Spanning September 12-13, 60 participants across 16 teams came together for Tasmania’s first-ever statewide game jam: Tasjam. The themes of the jam were “Voices,” and “Access,” which were designed to evoke discussions and thinking about diversity, and the importance of having a voice and being heard, no matter who you are or where you’re from.

Tasjam was organised as a joint venture between the Tasmanian Game Development Society, and Startup Tasmania, as part of the Startup Spring festival. With venues in both Hobart, Launceston, and a satellite venue in Burnie, the event was truly statewide, and included participants of a wide variety of ages and skill levels. The event was featured in both the Mercury and Examiner print newspapers, and also on the ABC Drive program in both Northern Tasmania, and Hobart.

Tasjam was a huge success, honestly at this stage I’m still completely overwhelmed with just how well it went, how great our attendees all were, and the quality of the games that were produced! In fact, all of the Tasjam games are available to play over at the jam submission page hosted by

Events in Hobart, Launceston, and Burnie went off without a hitch, which is pretty exciting for us, given that this is the first time that we’ve run a game jam. We had 60 participants across 16 teams, and a large number of observers dropping by in both Hobart and Launceston just to see what it was all about. This included Minister Michael Ferguson, who went on to speak of highly of the event, and the full Startup Spring festival, during standing parliament. Thanks for your support, Minister Ferguson!

Minister Michael Ferguson

I think my favourite thing about the event was the inclusion of the Hobart CoderDojo team, helmed by John Dalton and Ruth Howard. Ruth and John project managed a team of 8-12 year olds to produce Quest for the Lost Voices, a game about a world held together by music, which has since fractured. The player is tasked with gathering musical notes and finding the last recorded music in existence, and using them to return power to the machine that can make the world whole again.


The CoderDojo kids, Oliver Dalton, Sebastian Dalton, Harry Howard, Gypsy Polacheck, and Leo Wang worked tirelessly throughout the weekend, and eventually produced a game using Scratch which included a cutscene, voice acting, and a beautiful hand-crafted aesthetic.

All of our attendees were amazing, and have produced some truly impressive games for a total of 32 hours of effort. It was fantastic to have Secret Lab in attendance, both for their experience, and the fact that they immediately disqualified themselves for choosing to spend the jam working on a game that not only didn’t meet the jam theme, but also had been in production in the days previous. It’s great that they decided to come along to soak up the atmosphere, and provide help over the weekend. Thanks Paris and Jon!

The Giant Margarita team were on site, and despite having their game idea crippled by a technical problem, forged ahead and produced a game that found a new angle on the theme.

I’m really in love with the concept behind Josh Bush‘s submission, Voices of the Past. The idea of concentrating on an elderly person’s fragmented memories, and the fact that often the elderly feel that their voices aren’t really heard in the wider community is a beautiful treatment of the themes of the jam.

Many lessons were learned, and even teams that didn’t reach their self-directed goals have said that they felt really positive about what they were able to achieve, and the new relationships they’ve formed with people of a similar mindset. It’s late and I’m tired, so I won’t continue to go through the submissions from our other teams. Suffice it to say, though, I’m ever thankful for the efforts and attendance of all of our participants for helping to make the inaugural Tasjam such a massive success.

We’ve had numerous people asking when the next Tasjam will happen, and all I can say at this stage is that this thing was far too excellent to leave idle for long. Stay tuned!

I would like to thank our amazing judges and mentors, Kamina Vincent (Tin Man Games), Katie Gall, and Lauren Clinnick (Both from Lumi Consulting) for making the trip down to Hobart from Melbourne to be with us. I believe their attendance and the role they filled is something that makes Tasjam unique, with many teams praising them for their constructive input on design and mechanic choice.


I would also like to thank our volunteers, and my co-organisers Eloise Macdonald-Meyer and James Riggall for their efforts to bring Tasjam to fruition. Their endless wells of enthusiasm and energy are an inspiration, and I very much look forward to working with them on future projects in Tasmania and more broadly!

Tasjam wouldn’t have been possible without the support of our generous sponsors!

  • The Australian Computer Society
  • The Tasmanian State Government
  • Startup Tasmania
  • Surprise Attack
  • PAX Australia
  • Bitlink
  • Lumi Consulting
  • Tin Man Games
  • Mighty Games
  • Y’all
  • The Typewriter Factory
  • The Queen Victoria Museum & Art Gallery
  • TasICT



Generally speaking, self-confidence is fickle. We can sway from highly effective, confidence-fuelled motivation, to the depths of discouragement with little more than the passing word of a stranger. So much of our self-worth is affected by our reflection in the mirror of our peers, that many of us use ritualistic affirmations or mantras just to tread water, and some are forced to resort to a chemical bolster.

In my time as a freelance writer, the bulk of my work has been published online. This comes with a built-in feedback engine, but page comments are often little more than an echo chamber for assholes, so reading them can be tantamount to taking a bath in bad tidings. This depends on the quality of the community associated with any given website, of course, but Internet comments regularly present as an outlet for maladjusted monsters, hiding behind anonymity, with nothing better to do than shout at the world for its great many imagined slights.

When I first began releasing my work to the slavering maw of the anonymous Internet, every negative comment caused me physical pain. I felt every slight and correction to my core, and began to fear for the future of my newly formed career. Over time, I calloused myself to their stinging words, and like a fisherman in waders, eventually learned to stride through their murky waters without fear, dragging my prizes from the mud and silt.

By far the most effective method for shoring up one’s confidence is to seek feedback, but feedback is inherently risky. Publishing a creative work is an act of courage, like blindly setting forth on a path that is equally likely to be lined with barbs as moss. “Feedback is vital, I think,” said David Rayfield, my friend, and overlord of, in an email on the subject. “The obligatory ‘good article!’ tweet is fine but doesn’t really convey anything other than ‘I read this, and now I’m telling you,'” he continued. “One of the best pieces of feedback I had was for a live music review. It was for a Noel Gallagher show. Since it was for print, someone wrote an actual letter to expand on something I said I wasn’t sure about in the review. Not to criticise, but to say they enjoyed the review and help me with a bit of local history that they were experts about.” This experience really affected David, and gave him a serious boost in confidence, ” it shocked me someone would go to this effort (who the hell writes letters anymore?) but also that they liked what I wrote enough to help me out. It made me want to write more which is the ultimate result of good feedback.”

The feedback you receive could inspire your next great work, or send you forever into the slough of despond. The trick, of course, is to seek feedback that you are confident will encourage, whether praise or criticism, to pierce the blindfold and better help you to seek the mossy side of the path.

When I wrote my first article for a print publication back in 2013, I was not confident. My brief was vague, and this freedom soon began to feel like a noose. Had I overreached and strayed too far from my original point? On submitting my first draft, my editor’s response was “not bad,” and included an attached copy of another writer’s work as an example of what I should be aiming to produce. My heart sank. Confidence low. My initial instinct was to drop everything and disappear into a cave. Thankfully, common sense prevailed and I decided to sit down with both articles and take comparative notes. I realised that some of my fears had proven accurate. I was correct to worry that I had gone off-brief, so I rewrote my conclusion to better answer my introduction. Aside from that, and a few grammatical niggles, I decided that second draft was worth submitting. Confidence rising.

When that draft went to print, I was incredibly excited. I bought two copies from a local newsagent before my subscription copy could even make its way to my desk. I marvelled at my words, laid out for the first time in traditional print-format columns. I pointed out my byline to any passing colleague that would look, and drank in their congratulations like a refreshing draught. Confidence high.

Days passed. Had anyone even read my column? Why hadn’t I heard anything? Is it so bad that no-one wants to mention it, hoping that eventually I’ll get bored and go away? Negative feedback is one thing, but a dearth of feedback is a special kind of torture. The adulations of friends and family rang hollow in my ears, dulled by the social contract that requires them them to be encouraging. What I needed was feedback from an honest source, but how would I find it? If I had requested feedback, the response couldn’t be trusted; either the responder would deliver more hollow positivity, or they would feel compelled to pick holes in order to make themselves relevant. Frustrated, I gave up on my search. Confidence low.

More time passed, until a tweet caught my eye. A conversation between two people that I follow made reference to my article. I clicked to view the entire conversation, only to find that it was started by someone that I didn’t follow, who had hoped to pitch an entry to the column I had written for, but had read mine and feared that it was too hard an act to follow. Wow! Confidence soaring.

I was struck at how much I was affected by this unsolicited feedback. Before I’d seen it, my confidence in the article was so low that I wouldn’t even bother to include it in my portfolio when pitching work to new publications. Now, it tops the list. Where once I would wince at every unnecessary adjective and overlong paragraph, I now see some solid work, with quirks from which to learn and improve. My entire perspective on the article was changed by fewer than 140 characters, written by someone I had never met. Feedback is important.

I was initially frustrated by how much of an effect this tweet had on my confidence in the article. I worried that the opposite could easily occur. I was annoyed that there was no objective method for assessing whether or not a piece of my own work was ‘good enough.’ As a response to this, I am putting together Feedback Loop, a community of writers that wish to both give and receive high quality feedback to those that seek it.

Members of Feedback Loop understand that good feedback is hard to find. For the most part the best feedback we get tends toward the negative, especially from time-pressured editors that just need to get content published. Truly helpful feedback needs to teach the author to evaluate themselves, to be able to positively and objectively assess their own work. Feedback shouldn’t conform to arbitrary rules that turn positive feedback into a cloak for negative feedback, rather it should be designed to edify the author. Seek to teach a writer to view their work through the lens of the audience and the editor.

In closing I charge you with a task: if you see a piece of creative work that you like, please find a way to let the author know that you like it, and why. If you see something that could be improved, find a way to constructively describe how. If you know the author, find a way to give them feedback without it seeming hollow or obligatory. Most of all, when you are providing feedback on a creative work, remember that the author has far more of themselves invested in that work than they may know. Your words are powerful, please use them wisely.

Header artwork by the incredible Cal Skuthorpe, aka @buzz_clik. Go tell him how great he is.


High quality feedback is hard to find, no matter the creative endeavour. In my capacity as a freelance writer, I’ve been a part of many a frustrated conversation with my peers about the fact that no matter where we turn, the feedback we receive is either wholly negative, or cursory at best.

These conversations happen with such regularity that we began to dub them “Freelancer Support Group,” and it occurred to us that it would be valuable if we were to put together a community of like-minded creators seeking truly valuable feedback.

The trouble with the feedback that we usually receive is that it tends to take one of three forms:

  1. Online comments – for the most part, these are either vitriolic morsels of hate, or positive but perfunctory acknowledgements.
  2. Responses from editors – Generally the most positive feedback we receive from editors is simply that they publish our stories with few to no changes. Aside from that, it’s either short rejections, or sweeping changes. This isn’t their fault, it a fact of the compressed time that comes with the job, but it doesn’t do much to help a writer to improve themselves.
  3. Feedback from family and friends – “Good job,” and “great post,” are positive responses, but ultimately all they really tell us is that they read the post. Honest or not, family and friends have a social obligation to positively respond to your creative work, which makes it hard to view it as a source of edification.

Feedback Loop was built as a response to this, a collective of creatives that believe that our current social framework for feedback is broken, who wish to enter into an environment where feedback is open, honest, and focused on building people up, not breaking them down.

Members of Feedback Loop understand that positive feedback is a key part of responding to a piece of creative work. It isn’t a tool to help soften the blow of the the more ‘important,’ ‘valuable,’ or ‘necessary’ negative feedback, but rather it is key to helping people to improve. We hold fast to the truth that positive feedback directly leads to creatives being able to positively assess themselves and their own work, to know their strengths, and to learn how to cater to them.

The simple way to do this is to ensure that when you’re giving positive feedback, you don’t just tell the creator that you liked their work, but why. Tell them what exactly it is about their creation that you enjoy, what it made you feel, what it taught you, how it suits the form they’ve chosen. Anything that occurs to you.

Negative feedback will certainly continue to exist — it’s important that we also ensure that people are helped to identify their missteps, but it will not be the cornerstone of the collective.

Most importantly, Feedback Loop is a safe space for creatives to make themselves vulnerable to their peers. It’s a community in which feedback is delivered with the sole purpose of helping its members to better themselves.

If you would like to join Feedback Loop, please send an email to, and we’ll ensure that you’re added to the tool that we use to facilitate communication. Come join us, and help us make feedback something to celebrate, not to fear.

Header artwork by the incredible @buzz_clik. Go and give HIM some wonderful, life-giving feedback.


February 13th, 2013 | Posted by Jason Imms in Uncategorized - (0 Comments)

After two unsuccessful attempts, today we were some of the lucky few to make it into Crumb Street Kitchen. I still don’t know how I feel about the implied need to queue up before the doors open, but the intensely delectable food on offer does take the edge off the frustration of being turned away twice previously.

On offer today was an eighteen hour slow roasted brisket, and pulled pork. At Crumb Street, you can order the meat du jour in 100g portions, and also have the choice of a few meals which make use of these meats, as well as a few sides. Between three adults and two children, we ordered 100g of each meat, two brisket and southern Carolina bbq sauce sandwiches, a pulled pork and home-made bbq sauce sandwhich, a pulled pork taco, and a few sides. This totalled a trifling $46.50.

What followed is now only a hazy memory of meat and happiness, but I can tell you that I will be back, and that the food I experienced today stands at the peak of my own charcoal grilling/roasting aspirations. I sincerely hope that Crumb Street Kitchen becomes successful enough to deal with the scarcity issue, and will become a permanent fixture in a city previously devoid of such necessary delicacies.


January 16th, 2013 | Posted by Jason Imms in Opinion - (5 Comments)

The following began life as a Facebook comment, which then somehow turned into a manifesto. So I guess it belongs here too?

While shuffling rooms around at home, I had to PICK UP and move FOUR boxes of audio cassettes to a place that WAS NOT the GARBAGE BIN.

Y’know how it sucks when you’re moving house, and you’re packing up bookshelves and thinking “Ugh, the last time I even touched these books was when I was unpacking them after moving in here,”? How much more for cassette tapes, a technology invented to solve a problem that NO LONGER EXISTS, a medium that cannot be played-back by any device in our possession, a lossy simulacrum of music we once enjoyed and yet now scarcely remember.

Dear readers, shed these dusty media tombs. Free yourselves from the entirely self-inflicted burden of nostalgia, and make space in your storage room for some other useless piece of life’s detritus.


July 11th, 2012 | Posted by Jason Imms in Opinion - (7 Comments)

Today during yet another aimless lunchtime rumination with friends, I was spitballing the idea of a website that is not only entirely crowd-funded, but also crowd-directed. The site would essentially be a blank slate, with no inherent direction or mission. It wouldn’t be a site specifically about videogames, technology, cars, music, or world news, but it could be about all of those things. It would be focused utterly on topics suggested, developed and chosen by the community.

Users would be asked to fund the site through donations, in a fashion similar to Kickstarter, with every donation over a certain dollar amount garnering that user a single vote. These votes could then be spent to either pitch a commissioned long-form written piece on the topic of their choice, or to vote for an idea that has already been pitched. This means that the entirety of the site’s content would be driven by the community, a community that is engaged enough to pay for the content that they want to see produced, and they would have actual agency in its production.

Site contributors would consist of a dedicated team of editors and writers, supported by community members that wish to try their hand at writing pieces themselves. Users of the site would also be able to apply to write pieces that exist in the list, given sufficient evidence of their experience with the topic. Site staff would then work with these community writers, helping them by providing contacts, advice, stylistic guidelines, and an experienced editorial voice. Pieces would also be sought and published from well-known guest writers from around the world, obviously subject to availability.

The idea isn’t without its flaws, here’s just a few:

  1. Getting started would be the most difficult part. Users will only contribute to a site that they have confidence in, how would we initially build that confidence, and support ourselves while we do so?
  2. Given the generally acerbic nature of Internet feedback, how would the editorial team measure and act on feedback?
  3. How long would it take before the list is completely dominated by porn-related pitches?
  4. Considering the fact that money is involved, how much power would site staff have in dismissing pitches that were deemed uninteresting or distasteful?
  5. How would the community funding work with advertising before the site becomes self-sufficient?
  6. How would we encourage return readership? An RSS feed may prove frustrating, as the content would probably be incredibly varied and difficult to categorise.
  7. All that the site would be able to guarantee is a high quality of writing, and excellent presentation. The content itself is almost completely unpredicatble.
  8. Perhaps the funding side of the idea is crazy? Should we just focus on the community-driven content aspect? Aside from the obvious, there are numerous advantages to community funding:
    1. A community that invests financially, invests passionately and often vocally.
    2. Trolls and other malcontents would be discouraged.
    3. Sufficient community funding would negate the need for advertising, producing a cleaner, more pleasant site.

I’m still not 100% convinced that this is a good idea, but the fact that my initial dismissal has subsequently brain-wormed its way into this blog post, I can’t shake the feeling that there might be something there.

It’s a community-focused site, so I guess the best thing to do is to post the idea and see if the nebulous but evidently powerful “crowd” takes to it. Right at this very second I’m pretty excited by it, and I hope that you see potential in it too. I’ll post more as the idea matures.


March 20th, 2012 | Posted by Jason Imms in Uncategorized - (0 Comments)

Regarding Christian Higley’s recent posts on Bitmob about giving up on his dream career in games journalism.

Christian, I don’t know whether you’ll ever read this, but I hope you do. I was very sorry to read your heartfelt post on the subject of the industry’s club-like nature, and I just wanted to say that I truly hope that you make it to a place that will see you try again.

In my very short time pursuing a career doing the same, I have been met with nothing but encouragement and support. I don’t know whether you were simply in contact with the wrong people, or just unlucky, but I do know that there are people out there that would be more than willing to help you get on your feet. No one is going to give just give you a job out of the kindness of their hearts, but I could name a number of people who are reasonably prominent in the industry that would be willing to read over your work, give you tips for pitching to particular editors, and generally help you on your way.

The best thing that any young writer could do is to just write. Write as much as you can, be it on a blog or a community site like Bitmob. Building up a portfolio of work is essential to any writing application and even if it’s left unpublished, you’ll at least be getting into the habit of writing regularly.

As Scott Nichols said in his response, freelance writing isn’t a career choice to make if you want to, y’know, earn money. It is tough work, full of rejection, derision, and self-doubt. You will be constantly trying to make contact with incredibly busy people whose only available contact points are an underused Twitter account and oversaturated email address. You’ll face critique from faceless Internet gremlins, and hateful responses from people upon whose products you’ve voiced a negative opinion. You will chase money for work that you completed weeks previously, and that which you do receive will be less than you hoped.

It’s hard work, but it can also be incredibly rewarding. It could take you places, and introduce you to people that you’ve only dreamed about. You’ll be writing about the things that you love, and being paid to tell people that they should love them too! Who knows? Perhaps one day it will lead you to editing a publication that has been with you throughout your childhood, giving you the opportunity to shape it in order to teach the youth of that day about the beauty of the entertainment medium that we love!

Please consider continuing your attempts, Christian. From what I’ve seen, you’ve certainly got skill enough that it would be a shame to set it aside.


January 19th, 2012 | Posted by Jason Imms in Uncategorized - (0 Comments)

Dial tone.
Beep boop beep beep boop boop beep boop beep beep.
“Hello, thankyou for calling generic phone support line, your call is very important to us. Please hold for the next 47 years.”

“Hello, this is Heavily Accented David, how may I help you? Also this call is being recorded, but only if you don’t try and reference it in the future to get me into trouble for the fact that I am demonstrably terrible at my job.”
“Hi, I’m having trouble with a thing.”
“We have no reports of outages in your area.”
“I can’t be bothered arguing with you. Put me through to your supervisor.”
“One moment… Please hold for a further six months.”

“Hello, this is Slightly More Lightly Accented Shane. How may I help you?”
“Hi, I’m having trouble with a thing. Your subordinate couldn’t help me.”
“Allow me to look into it… We have no outages reported in your area.”
“Look, I’m very well qualified to tell you that the problem is with your system, not mine. Just put me through to someone that can actually help me, skip all people that are required to speak from a script.”

“Hi, this is Simon and I’m actually from your country. How may I help you?”
“I’m having trouble with a thing DON’T TELL ME THAT THERE ARE NO OUTAGES IN MY AREA.”
“There is an outage in your area, routing you to another exchange. The problem should be resolved.”
“Are you alright sir?”
“I’m fine. That was merely forty seven and a half years of frustration being released. I can’t feel my legs.”
“Would you like me to put you through to the paramedic service?”
“Thank you, I would appreciate that.”
“Hello, your emergency is very important to us. Please hold as we are currently experiencing a high volume of human suffering.”

“Your emergency is still just as important to us as it was before. For priortisation purposes, please rate your discomfort from 1-9 using the keys on your phone.”
“I’m sorry, I don’t understand.”
“Neither to I, lady robot. Neither to I.”


January 18th, 2012 | Posted by Jason Imms in Opinion - (3 Comments)

I tend to equate my writing deadlines with various forms of the undead. I know zombies are out of vogue these days but I think it makes sense, even aside from the obvious naming similarity. By way of example, a normal deadline is like a regular ol’ zombie: An object of dread, steadily and inexorably threatening to tear you asunder should you allow it to get too close. On their own they’re not that threatening, but in a group? Terrifying.

Last-minute or short deadlines are similar to the modern fast zombie, a-la 28 Days Later or Left 4 Dead. Same description as the above, but moving at an incredible pace, a more immediate horror. Attempting to complete a writing task under a Fast Zombie Deadline is best described as an incessant scream, undercut with the sound of a keyboard being worked furiously, as though typing is all that is holding the assailant at bay. On an unrelated note, The Typing of the Dead was awesome.

Assignments without a defined deadline are like ghosts. Ghostly deadlines are invisible and easy to forget about, right up until the point that they float up through the floor, shout “BOO” and possess you until you’ve completed their unfinished business.

All deadlines are like vampires in that if you’re not careful they’ll suck your blood, leaving you an empty husk.