SnakesRCute wrote:I was wondering about the new 2 inch or less binder rule. Is the measurement defined as the width of the spine or the diameter of the rings? Because I always thought it was width of the spine but apparently its actually the diameter of the rings.
dvegadvol wrote:I think reducing binder size is a good thing. Last year, there were many 6 inch binders at competition!
How are you setting up your binder given this change?
UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:dvegadvol wrote:I think reducing binder size is a good thing. Last year, there were many 6 inch binders at competition!
How are you setting up your binder given this change?
Our binder looks the same haha. I don't know how people manage big binders. They're ridiculous to maneuver to me.
Things2do wrote:UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:dvegadvol wrote:I think reducing binder size is a good thing. Last year, there were many 6 inch binders at competition!
How are you setting up your binder given this change?
Our binder looks the same haha. I don't know how people manage big binders. They're ridiculous to maneuver to me.
It just takes practice. We had 5 inches of stuff in a 6 inch binder for Crave The Wave, and we could find almost anything in it in about 10 seconds. We had to have the extra room to maneuver the papers, and it was a bit bulky, but it came in handy. It also requires the right kinda rings, or it won't allow the pages to move.
UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:Things2do wrote:UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F wrote:Our binder looks the same haha. I don't know how people manage big binders. They're ridiculous to maneuver to me.
It just takes practice. We had 5 inches of stuff in a 6 inch binder for Crave The Wave, and we could find almost anything in it in about 10 seconds. We had to have the extra room to maneuver the papers, and it was a bit bulky, but it came in handy. It also requires the right kinda rings, or it won't allow the pages to move.
Well now I'm curious what you had in 5 inches of paper for Crave the Wave...
Benewcomb wrote:Yeah we had a either 1or 2 inch I don’t remember. It doesn’t make much of a difference 6 inch or 2 inch, unless you have too much info. Then you resort to tiny font and page by page color coding.
I've had a 5" binder for Rocks, Fossils, and Herpetology so it does make a bit of a difference cutting that much size off IMO
emxl wrote:I've had a 5" binder for Rocks, Fossils, and Herpetology so it does make a bit of a difference cutting that much size off IMO
I've always found it harder to find information in bigger binders, so what's your opinion on this? How was the five inch binder organized?
ScottMaurer19 wrote:emxl wrote:I've had a 5" binder for Rocks, Fossils, and Herpetology so it does make a bit of a difference cutting that much size off IMO
I've always found it harder to find information in bigger binders, so what's your opinion on this? How was the five inch binder organized?
I always have the list/some form of the list in the front, then general info and charts, then the specimen pages themselves (all in sheet protectors so I could take them out of the binder easily at competition)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests