Revision en3, by isaf27, 2020-04-25 01:11:15

Hello Codeforces.

I'm writing this post to make comments about a situation on the last Codeforces Round and tell the bad news. We did many mistakes and due to them, the round caused much dissatisfaction from the Codeforces community.

Some of our mistakes:

1. Some stupid mistakes in the statements.

2. In the problem D2E/D1C the numbers $d_i$ were not necessarily sorted, but there were no pretests for that.

3. The checker of the problem D2F/D1D didn't check one of the requirements and due to that $8$ solutions failed on pretests during the system testing.

4. After the editorial was posted the mistake was found in the main solution of the problem D1E (more details here). Now we don't know the correct solution.

So, the round was very unsuccessful, I'm very sorry about this. I will make conclusions and will try to avoid such situations later. Please, treat with respect to the authors, even in such a bad situation, a big work was done and I hope you enjoyed the problems.

Now about the bad news: due to the wrong checker and the wrong solution, we decided to make Div1 round unrated, Div2 round is still rated, Sorry for all, who had a big positive rating change.

Also, we are making a D1E problem-solving challenge: if you have an algorithm, that can be proven, please share your approach.

So, that was all news, sorry again,

Ivan.

P.S.

If you are angry now, you can use this post to set a dislike, please don't dislike an announcement/editorial.

#### History

Revisions

Rev. Lang. By When Δ Comment
en3 isaf27 2020-04-25 01:11:15 4 Tiny change: 'van.\n\n**p.s.**\n\nIf ' -> 'van.\n\n**P.S.**\n\nIf '
en2 isaf27 2020-04-25 01:10:27 3 Tiny change: 'dislike announcem' -> 'dislike an announcem'
en1 isaf27 2020-04-25 01:07:39 1589 Initial revision (published)