We've tried to streamline the process to make it less of an arduous process for the applicant, and in due course ourselves too; as discussed, there's now more overlap between strategy and card choices for content, and less reliance on descriptions of literally every card you run. This should give applicants a little more freedom to get creative with strategy talk rather than rote descriptions of 100 cards. The option is still there if you really want to, but you don't need to - for specific card discussions, highlights from the list is recommended moving forward.
We've also switched up the basic structure of the template a little so that, if you decide to use it, based on comments here at least the content you see initially should be less 'down the rabbit hole' and more 'ooh, trail of breadcrumbs' and hopefully be a more enjoyable read for a first-time viewer.
And for current primer curators, there's no need to update your lists to reflect these changes. Again, you can if you want, but you don't need to.
The template has been updated to reflect these changes, and we will be looking at how things go moving forward. Anything that doesn't quite work, we'll look into it.
If anyone out there wants to be the pilot case for the new formatting, feel free to apply
It's a response to how the majority of submissions have panned out, with the feedback on perfectly solid write-ups boiling down to "here's a bunch of small notes/typos, and put some more meat on your strategy section". So we've added a list of possible talking points to the template to try to unfurl tongues. Combine that with authors not entering the most important part of the primer winded after a card options slog and hopefully this will be less common now.
