Re: anonymous posts

• From: lkranston <no_reply_at_yahoogroups.com>
• Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:03:35 -0000
• Message-ID: <b89qg7+l3r5_at_...>

I agree with you 100 percent!

Publius

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, grapesmoker <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> There's been a whole assfull of anonymous posts on the boards 
these 
> last couple weeks. If you're going to come out here and call us 
all 
> chumpmonkeys, at least have the balls to say who you are. It's 
easy, 
> and I would say cowardly, to insult people from behind the veil of 
> anonymity.
> 
> Also, there's good reason to discuss tournaments online in a 
public 
> forum, and there's good reason to address perceived injustices in 
> the forums too. I wasn't at ACF Nats but I can certainly 
sympathize 
> with Vanderbilt's situation. If something was done poorly, I think 
> the community deserves to hear about it, and we benefit from 
> learning about the mistakes of others. The Vanderbilt/Harvard 
> situation will hopefully benefit the circuit by emphasizing the 
> importance of having a tiebreaker policy in place, which not every 
> tournament does. Likewise, if a tournament was run exceptionally 
> well (like the NAQT ICT [at least the DII matches], regardless of 
> any of its other shortcomings) we should all hear about that as 
well 
> so we can get a better feel for how tournaments ought to be run.
> 
> Jerry