Re: Reinventing the wheel

nephelococcygia <*dthorsle_at_nephelococcygia.yahoo.invalid*> · Fri, 04 Jul 2003 14:04:52 -0000

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, "darwins_bulldog1138" 
<darwins_bulldog1138_at_y...> wrote:
> > Quick and dirty intuitive evidence of this -- how many of you have
> > met someone knew, told them you did quiz bowl, and been asked for 
a
> > sample question?  Happens a lot, right?  And when someone asks you
> > what a typical question is like, do you really pull some six-
sentence
> > behemoth out of your vast memory banks?
> 
> > Here again, in fact they do not.  Depending on the question 
content,
> > playing more than ten games in one day can get... tedious...
> 
> Both of these comments speak to a dangerous principle: that the
> structure of quizbowl should be determined by people who do not like
> or are not involved in quizbowl. The sports analogy fits that bill
> somewhat as well. Why should preference be given to the wants of
> people who find playing more games "tedious" over those who don't?
> What does explaining the game to someone who's not involved have to 
do
> with anything?
> 
I think you are misinterpreting Bruce's point; I thought he was 
referring to people interested in joining quizbowl, not some random 
schlub off the street.  Since having new people get involved is 
necessary to replace those lost to graduation and/or maturity, I 
think their opinions matter.  This is not a cult; swearing allegiance 
to certain principles is not required in order to be some sort of a 
bona fide quizbowl player.

As for the questions as to the number of games played: no tournament 
with bad questions is too short and no tournament with good questions 
is long enough.  To paraphrase something said about GT MLK, I'd 
rather play 8-10 rounds of first-rate questions than 13-15 rounds of 
tedious crap.  I would also be more confident that the best team won 
the tournament in the first case.  If the time required to edit 
becomes a concern, quality should trump quantity. [Tons of first-rate 
questions is, of course, always the best possible option.]

> I'm fully prepared to write lengthy explanations of the answers to 
all
> the question I posed, if you really want me to, but I was hoping 
that
> certain things were already understood.
> 
Actually Matt, you go ahead and do that.  I'm curious to see as to 
how many people in the circuit will wholeheartedly agree with the 
answers you propose to those questions; I imagine it's a lot fewer 
than you think.  I'd imagine most people's answers will be similar to 
the Bruce's: there would be general agreement for most situations, 
but people would be able to come up with situations where we remember 
that these rules were not brought down from Sinai.

You seem to want to put an end to argument as to your fundamental 
principles of quizbowl.  As long as new people become involved in 
quizbowl its rules will have to be justified to each new generation 
of players.  The only way there will be no argument is if qb becomes 
nothing more than a quasi-intellectual circle-jerk closed to new 
blood and new ideas.  The only major debate at that point will be 
whether the color of quizbowl's tower is ecru, eggshell, or ivory.

Dave