I want to start this by saying that I thought the majority of questions (at least the ones in categories I had any chance of getting) were accessible and well-edited. The editing was great. After I say that, though, there is a caveat. --- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, "Matt Keller" <mkeller99_at_h...> wrote: > Some of the questions seemed like they could definitely be just as > good with a few lines cut out...I saw several that were 8 or 9 >lines long in 10 pt font, which just seems unnecesarry to me. As an example, one question that I wrote and which was used at Regionals had 2-3 lines added to it. The question was well-edited; I do not dispute that. The information provided in the additional information was, IMO, perfectly pyramidal in the question's structure. However, these additional facts were just that-- additional. Almost superfluous. There were two nuggets the editors added that I purposely omitted in the original because the question seemed long and gettable anyway. I know I can be very guilty of trying to smash in all the cool facts that I know/have just learned when writing a question, and I realize that having ever more facts does increase pyramidality, but does every fact or almost every fact really _need_ to be there? As long as the question is pyramidally structured, why must there be a surfeit of facts? N.b., I am a fan of slightly longer, more developed questions than the simple structure "One hard clue. One medium clue. One stupidly easy clue." Nevertheless, it seemed to me that _some_ (not all) of the questions this past weekend gained little if anything from additional factual verbiage. Overall, the questions and editing were good, but some questions seemed to drag on, & I wonder how much of it was necessary. Just my dois reais...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:47 AM EST EST