EFT - Revision history

June Yin at 05:12, 10 December 2021

2021-12-10T05:12:52Z

Ophir Lifshitz: /* Discussion */ QQ

2021-05-12T08:22:44Z

Discussion: QQ

Ophir Lifshitz: links etc

2021-04-16T01:28:55Z

links etc

Show changes

Ophir Lifshitz: /* 2019 */ Big Chungus Bonus Preservation Society

2021-04-15T21:15:06Z

2019: Big Chungus Bonus Preservation Society

Ophir Lifshitz: More tabular without
s

2021-04-15T20:11:11Z

More tabular without <br>s

Show changes

Ophir Lifshitz: the loreax

2021-04-08T11:25:57Z

the loreax

Ophir Lifshitz: more Lorelord

2021-04-08T11:21:27Z

more Lorelord

Ophir Lifshitz: put true and relevant information onto the quizbowiki

2021-04-08T10:59:02Z

put true and relevant information onto the quizbowiki

Show changes

Kevin Wang at 05:24, 8 April 2021

2021-04-08T05:24:17Z

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

2021-04-08T05:07:31Z

Discussion

@@ Line 805: / Line 805: @@
 <references />
 [[Category:mACF events]]
 [[Category:Tournaments]]

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 The set also featured [[Andrew Wang]]'s memorable tossup on "carbon and carbon," which [[Graham Reid]] described as "pathological."<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=350010#p350010</ref> The question was changed to ask for "these bonds" in later mirrors, but the mere existence of this question inspired several players to neg future tossups that used the [[pronoun]] "these two elements" with the answer "carbon and carbon."
-<blockquote style="font-family: serif; max-width: 69.420em;">
+{{qq|
 <b>A bond between these two elements is reversibly formed and broken in a Wanzlick equilibrium. Some schemes for forming bonds between these two elements use catalytic cycles consisting of oxidative addition, transmetalation, and reductive elimination. A bond forms between these two elements in the first step of a reaction that has a four-membered oxaphosphetane ring intermediate. A bond between these two elements forms in palladium-catalyzed (*)</b> coupling reactions. Organometallic reagents are often used to produce bonds between these two elements by giving one of them an atypical nucleophilic character. Bonds between these two elements are simply drawn as lines with no labels in skeletal structures of molecules. For 10 points, the backbone of organic chemistry consists of bonds between what two elements, which both have an atomic mass of 12?
 ANSWER: <u>'''carbon'''</u> AND <u>'''carbon'''</u> [or <u>'''C'''</u> AND <u>'''C'''</u>; or <u>'''two carbons'''</u>; accept <u>'''carbon–carbon bonds'''</u>]
-</blockquote>
+}}
 {| class="wikitable sortable"

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 ===2019===
 The [https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22625 2019] iteration of EFT was played by roughly 210 total teams across 14 mirrors, likely setting a record.
 ===2018===

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 French's hyperbolic arguments were widely criticized, with [[Billy Busse]] comparing them to "throwing a temper tantrum at McDonalds because they put pickles on your burger after you asked for no pickles."<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=353414#p353414</ref>
-The set also featured Andrew Wang's memorable tossup on "carbon and carbon," which [[Graham Reid]] described as "pathological."<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=350010#p350010</ref> The question was changed to ask for "these bonds" in later mirrors, but the mere existence of this question inspired several players to neg future tossups that used the [[pronoun]] "these two elements" with the answer "carbon and carbon."
+The set also featured [[Andrew Wang]]'s memorable tossup on "carbon and carbon," which [[Graham Reid]] described as "pathological."<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=350010#p350010</ref> The question was changed to ask for "these bonds" in later mirrors, but the mere existence of this question inspired several players to neg future tossups that used the [[pronoun]] "these two elements" with the answer "carbon and carbon."
 <blockquote style="font-family: serif; max-width: 69.420em;">
@@ Line 164: / Line 164: @@
 ====Discussion====
-EFT was one of the first tournaments to collect [[detailed stats]] (and specifically buzzpoints) on a large scale, following trials at [[MYSTERIUM]], [[2016 Terrapin]], [[TTIAC]], and [[Jordaens]] in 2016–2017.
+EFT was one of the first tournaments to collect [[detailed stats]] (and specifically buzzpoints) on a large scale, following trials at [[MYSTERIUM]], EFT, [[2016 Terrapin]], [[TTIAC]], and [[Jordaens]] in 2016–2017.
 Many moderators had never used the new online scorekeeping system, or any online scoresheet, before. In the thread "[https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20540 PSA - Don't be a Luddite]," Will relayed that he had received complaints from attendees of the WUSTL mirror about several moderators who had misbehaved due to displeasure with the technology. After [[David Dennis]] came forward as one of the disgruntled individuals from the WUSTL mirror, [[Nicholas Conder]] expressed concern that learning a new system on short notice was a daunting task; [[Cody Voight]] (and a chorus of others) responded by asserting that it was easy to learn. Any conversation about how to improve the interface and usability of the technology was quickly drowned out by accusations of stupidity, malice, and incompetence leveled between those who had never used it and those who had.
@@ Line 486: / Line 486: @@
 '''EFT 4: Cattle-Related Vocabulary''' took place on October 3 and 4, 2009 at [[Brown]], [[Virginia]], [[Illinois]], [[Texas]], [[UCLA]], [[Millsaps]], [[Toronto]], [[Gonzaga]], and [[Macalester]]. Substantial portions of the set were written by [[Jerry Vinokurov]], [[Guy Tabachnick]], [[Eric Mukherjee]], [[Aaron Rosenberg]], [[Daniel Klein]], and [[Ian Eppler]], with contributions from [[Seth Teitler]], [[Ike Jose]], [[Trygve Meade]], and [[Hannah Kirsch]].
-The tournament was mostly well-received, with most of the complaints centered on uneven bonus difficulty and mediocre copyediting. The tournament elicited discussion of the nature of [[stock clues]] after [[Andy Watkins]] criticized the use of the Reptile Fund as an early clue for Bismarck. A discussion of the trash distribution in academic tournaments also ensued.
+The tournament was mostly well-received, with most of the complaints centered on uneven bonus difficulty and mediocre copyediting. The tournament elicited discussion of the nature of [[stock clues]] after [[Andy Watkins]] criticized the use of the Reptile Fund as an early clue for Bismarck. A discussion of the [[trash]] distribution in academic tournaments also ensued.
 {{-}}
 {| class="wikitable"
@@ Line 574: / Line 574: @@
 '''EFT 3: Trapping Bees in a Dyson Sphere''' ran on October 4 and 11, 2008, at various sites around the country, including [[Brown]], [[Wake Forest]], [[Vanderbilt]], [[UCLA]], [[FSU]] and [[Illinois]], with many sites seeing record attendance (the Brown site had to cap registration at 24 teams due to staff shortages). The set was written in equal shares by [[Jerry Vinokurov]], [[Dennis Jang]], [[Eric Mukherjee]], and [[Aaron Rosenberg]], with contributions from [[Jonathan Magin]], [[Evan Nagler]], [[Lisa Qing]], and [[Eric Johnson]], and as tradition dictates, was assembled at 7 a.m. on the day of the tournament.
-The tournament was received well overall, with the exception of a tossup on peer-to-peer networks and an excess of questions on comic books in the trash distribution ([[Eric Mukherjee|everyone knows whose fault that is]]). The tournament also set off a large discussion about the writing of music questions, due to a tossup on the Leningrad Symphony containing some technical middle clues that were not [[uniquely identifying]].
+The tournament was received well overall, with the exception of a tossup on peer-to-peer networks and an excess of questions on comic books in the [[trash]] distribution ([[Eric Mukherjee|everyone knows whose fault that is]]). The tournament also set off a large discussion about the writing of music questions, due to a tossup on the Leningrad Symphony containing some technical middle clues that were not [[uniquely identifying]].
 EFT 3 was also notably the subject of Christian Flow's [[2008 Harvard Crimson Article|Mind Games Article]] in the Harvard Crimson, which followed the exploits of [[Dallas Simons]] and the Harvard B team.
@@ Line 638: / Line 638: @@
 [[Rutgers]] won the [[Brown]] mirror after defeating [[Harvard]], with [[Jason Keller]] winning the individual scoring award.  The tournament was a huge logistical nightmare however, and prizes couldn't be given because stats were not compiled in time.  Surprisingly, people did not complain.
-The question set itself was praised fairly highly, with some qualms about the length of the questions (which averaged somewhere between 6 and 7 lines), the difficulty of tossups on Tlaloc and Legendre, the representation of the social science canon (some liked it, some didn't), and a factual error about the writer of ''Harrison Bergeron''.  The two packets written exclusively by Jerry were also seen as much more difficult than the others.  Willie Chen returned briefly to complain about problems in the set that didn't exist, but was quickly refuted by Eric and [[Chris Ray]].
+The question set itself was praised fairly highly, with some qualms about the [[length limit|length of the questions]] (which averaged somewhere between 6 and 7 lines), the difficulty of tossups on Tlaloc and Legendre, the representation of the social science canon (some liked it, some didn't), and a factual error about the writer of ''Harrison Bergeron''.  The two packets written exclusively by Jerry were also seen as much more difficult than the others.  Willie Chen returned briefly to complain about problems in the set that didn't exist, but was quickly refuted by Eric and [[Chris Ray]].
 {{-}}
 {| class="wikitable"

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 The final product was thought to have overshot its intended difficulty, and its unfortunate editing situation meant that it was much rougher around the edges than previous iterations of EFT.
-In the general discussion thread, [[Justine French]] criticized putting hard clues in easy parts since it would dishearten players by rendering their knowledge useless.<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=352325#p352325</ref> Justine also claimed that [[detailed stats]] are a "significant burden on hosts" (forcing them to recruit double the staffers<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=353437#p353437</ref>), "only exist so that elite players can flex" (by "remembering clues from Chicago Open four years ago"), and are "actively harmful to the community" unless editors use them to actively fix questions.<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=353399#p353399</ref>
+In the general discussion thread, [[Justine French]] criticized [[McKenzie-style easy part|putting hard clues in easy parts]] since it would dishearten players by rendering their knowledge useless.<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=352325#p352325</ref> Justine also claimed that [[detailed stats]] are a "significant burden on hosts" (forcing them to recruit double the staffers<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=353437#p353437</ref>), "only exist so that elite players can flex" (by "remembering clues from Chicago Open four years ago"), and are "actively harmful to the community" unless editors use them to actively fix questions.<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=353399#p353399</ref>
 French's hyperbolic arguments were widely criticized, with [[Billy Busse]] comparing them to "throwing a temper tantrum at McDonalds because they put pickles on your burger after you asked for no pickles."<ref>https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=353414#p353414</ref>

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 ===2019===
-The [https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22625 2019] iteration.
+Roughly 215 teams played the [https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22625 2019] iteration of the set.
 ===2018===

@@ Line 157: / Line 157: @@
 ====Discussion====
-As one of the earliest tournaments to make use of Advanced Stats for buzzpoint tracking and scorekeeping, EFT 2017 marked the first time that many moderators had ever used the system and in some cases the first time they had used online scoresheets at all; the resulting growing pains were sizable. In the thread "[https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20540 PSA - Don't be a Luddite]", Will relayed that he had received complaints from attendees of the WUSTL mirror about several moderators who had misbehaved due to displeasure with the technology. After [[David Dennis]] came forward as one of the disgruntled individuals from the WUSTL mirror, [[Nicholas Conder]] expressed concern that learning a new system on short notice was a daunting task; [[Cody Voight]] (and a chorus of others) responded by asserting that it was easy to learn. Hardly starting on the politest of notes, the thread escalated to the point of vitriol within a dozen posts<sup>[https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=336218#p336218]</sup> and the conversation about how to improve the interface and usability of Advanced Stats was quickly drowned out by accusations of stupidity, malice, and incompetence leveled between those who had never used it and those who had.
+As one of the earliest sets to make use of Advanced Stats for buzzpoint tracking and scorekeeping, EFT 2017 marked the first time that many moderators had ever used the system and in some cases the first time they had used online scoresheets at all; the resulting growing pains were sizable. In the thread "[https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20540 PSA - Don't be a Luddite]", Will relayed that he had received complaints from attendees of the WUSTL mirror about several moderators who had misbehaved due to displeasure with the technology. After [[David Dennis]] came forward as one of the disgruntled individuals from the WUSTL mirror, [[Nicholas Conder]] expressed concern that learning a new system on short notice was a daunting task; [[Cody Voight]] (and a chorus of others) responded by asserting that it was easy to learn. Hardly starting on the politest of notes, the thread escalated to the point of vitriol within a dozen posts<sup>[https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=336218#p336218]</sup> and the conversation about how to improve the interface and usability of Advanced Stats was quickly drowned out by accusations of stupidity, malice, and incompetence leveled between those who had never used it and those who had.
 Though many people in the thread indicated that they found the new system as easy or easier than either online or paper scoresheets, it was clear that less experienced moderators likely found it harder. Ultimately, several improvements were made to Advanced Stats and the logistics surrounding it during the time period in which this thread was active (several in direct response to points raised), including updates to the instructions documents and changes in the way bonuses were inputted.

EFT - Revision history

June Yin at 05:12, 10 December 2021

Ophir Lifshitz: /* Discussion */ QQ

Ophir Lifshitz: links etc

Ophir Lifshitz: /* 2019 */ Big Chungus Bonus Preservation Society

Ophir Lifshitz: More tabular without s

Ophir Lifshitz: the loreax

Ophir Lifshitz: more Lorelord

Ophir Lifshitz: put true and relevant information onto the quizbowiki

Kevin Wang at 05:24, 8 April 2021

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

Ophir Lifshitz: More tabular without
s