To move some questions over from the Yale thread:
Should level restrictions be based on time limits?
In my opinion, Newcomer needs time protection (typically first semester, aka first 3 months of dancing). "Beginners" can benefit from a protected environment, so second sememster often deserves time protection as well.
However Fall competitions, I think, could have having Bronze be an unprotected level instead of the 3 semester limit they have. Likewise, either semester could benefit from exploring Hartwick's copper level idea -- make "copper" the time protected level (2/3 semster total limit) while brozne is unprotected and only deals with points.
Should there be restrictions on how many levels a competitor's entries can span?
There should be no extra restrictions on cross-style spans, other than what a couple is eligible for under time and points. Within a style, either one level only or the lowest legal level + a higher level. If competitions want to allow Novice as a third level (ie Silver, Gold and Novice), that's fine by me, but a Syllabus + Novice + Pre-Champ isn't in my opinion. (Ie the only time three levels is appropriate is when Novice is the only "open" level).
As a competitor, I prefer the 2 level span rule within a style; as an event organizer/official of the collegiate events I prefer the 1 level span within a style rule as it keeps the event sizes from exploding.
Should restrictions be based purely on a point system?
No (I think Newcomer at least needs a time restriction). Not sure what else you were alluding to? Something besides points and time? like what?
Also:
What happens to couples who are forced to move up before they are ready?
See my above discussion about splitting Bronze to Bronse + Copper to create a place for them to stay long term. However it seems that many of the "not ready" college couples would choose to dance silver anyways -- for social reasons (its where their friends probably are), ego reasons (I've been dancing X months, therefore I must be silver), etc
What rules least encourage dancing down?
Rules that make everyone feel like they have a chance to "succeed" at their "proper" level. Anytime you have levels like collegiate silver (hard chargers from the current year, the bulk of the 1-3 year group, plus the long term people that are either social/quasicompetitive, or from underpriviledged teams) you're going to have people wanting to dance down as they feel they have no chance. Also if teams emphasis placements only and not "progress" -- ie when you frist reach silver after having been pointed out of bronze, remember that making a cut (while not making the semi or the final) is still progress and a sign of success. Teams need to push this message so people don't get discouraged when they move up.
Rules that don't artificially inflate someone's level -- the two offenders here are the cross-style spanning rule and the time based rules. Though I feel the latter has mitigating circumstances so it can go either way.
How do people move up through the levels?
Hard work. Teams can help by explaining why the levels are structured the way they are, even if they don't agree with given comp, try to present the "positive" side of the arguements for those rules so people can respect even what they don't prefer. Teams can help by also explaining that what the judges look for at different levels can change -- as you go up the levels the judges tend to look for the 'bigger picture' -- judges who like technique (or flash) at low levels while start to require both at higher, people need to remember to work on their weaknesses, as well as their strengths as they move up.... What made you move up initially probably won't be the thing to improve to continue to move up.
