With all that said, I do have some feedback for jsalvatier! (Please don't take this as defecting criticism; also, in the interests of honesty - I noticed all of #2 shortly after the contest began, and kept quiet out of plain self-interest, waiting until the judging happened).
The contest was mishandled from the standpoint of publicity. I should not have been so confident I would win; there should have been more than 2 entries with $400 at stake for a task intrinsically worthwhile. There are a number of ways this could have been advertised better:
I agree with all of this, and thanks for the feedback. For my part in causing the judging to take long I apologize; I didn't try to delay it, but I definitely didn't put any explicit effort into speeding it up either. Publicity is one of the things we discussed in our brief retrospective. It's likely another contest will take place, and if it does, I will make an effort to spread the word, but am not committing to make such an effort that no more will be needed. ;)
The Spaced Repetition literature review prize for the best new review of the evidence on Spaced Repetition has ended and the judging panel has made its decision. The prize attracted entries from Duke (entry) and Gwern (entry). After reviewing the submissions separately and then discussing them together, the judging panel unanimously judged Gwern's entry to be the best.
With great pleasure, we now award Gwern the prize of $385.
Anki cards for Gwern's review are available as the shared deck "Gwern Spaced Repetition Lit Review". If you have improvements or alternate decks, post them in the comments.
The three judges, BenLowell, Guy Srinivasan and John Salvatier (me), are Seattle LessWrongers who volunteered to judge the contest.
We thank Duke and Gwern for their submissions, as well as users randomwalker, Antisuji, Dr_Manhattan, Benquo, Nick_Roy for contributing to the prize fund.