Re: Penn (was Tournament: Brandeis' etc.)

Michael Angelo Sorice <*msorice_at_theinfamoushairboy.yahoo.invalid*> · Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:58:07 -0000

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, "nicolas_walters" <Sywolf_at_a...>
wrote:
> ... All the Penn hating should really stop, because it was never
> prompted by anything. 
No, this is a cop-out. The replies to your posts couldn't be
characterized in any way as a bitter Penn hate fest, and it's too bad
to see this discussion reduced to people trying to defend themselves
rather than their positions. It was you who saw fit to make the
unprompted and unsupported claim that grad participation isn't in the
long term interest of the circuit and that non-submission events held
on high school questions are. Frankly, I don't see how you can be less
than overjoyed that the tone of the replies to such a claim have been
even so civil as they have, much less claim to be shocked that people
have taken issue with you said (or that they're taking issue with the
wrong part of it, or whatever you're trying to say.)

> ... I'd love to hear how you run question-writing workshops, and
> whether you make people write questions even if there's no 
> tournament coming up? 
While I'm glad that you've decided to consider some more circuit
events this year, I really have to take issue with this last
statement. Nobody can make anyone do much of anything and I, for one,
would not want to make someone put time into this game if they didn't
want to, even could I. To me, it sounds like your situation really
isn't all that dissimilar from anyone else's. I've yet to meet a
freshman who could write questions at a level that I'd consider
acceptable as an editor. That said, the solution is not (must not be,
in fact) to simply never have them write, as they then probably never
get better at writing (nor very much so at quizbowl.) Rather, the
answer must be to show your new kids the ropes and have them write a
little. I don't intend this to be a polemic on bringing along
"prospects" and I do appreciate the difficulty of attempting to
execute an officer's duties to a quizbowl team as an underclassman,
but I am absolutely positive that not writing and the kind of
segregation (on the basis of commitment to the game, of age, etc.) you
seem to be advocating (implicitly or not) cannot be the answer any of
us are looking for.

> ...Also, I really have no fear of grad students. I never really 
> mentioned them as my biggest problem with our region. Rather, this 
> whole thread started because of the proliferation of junior bird 
> events in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast, which I just happened to 
> note could be opened up for all undergrads.
Yes, but you did mention grad participation as being contrary to the
long term good of quizbowl, and as being against an imperative of
yours that, apparently, does not extend to question writing, i.e.
"[that quizbowl] should be an activity primarily for college students
and run by college students." My point is simply that, if, as you say,
you don't mind playing grads (outside of trash tournaments,) there are
numerous nearby tournaments that you might attend, if you so chose.
Since your argument for changing junior birds to undergrad tournaments
is rooted in your purported inability to attend events in your area, I
really have to question that argument.

> Also, I will keep insisting that more tournaments are opened up to
> non 1st and 2nd year players, through two divisions or CUT-
> style eligibility. Still waiting for someone to make the argument 
> against that, instead of flaming Penn's team for no good reason. 
There are a couple arguments against this that I can think of off
hand. In the first place, there ought to be some events for novices
and novices alone that may not be attended by experienced players. My
conception of things is that such events serve as an often necessary
introduction to college quizbowl against competition of similar
experience and (ideally) skill. Opening such events to all undergrads
may defeat the purpose of allowing a relatively "painless"
introduction to the game and will also retard the growth of the
upperclassmen playing at the events by denying them interaction with
the circuit at large. Moreover, since most tournaments (including all
nationals) still allow grad participation, the creation of a large
number of novice-only events will create a group accustomed to
artificially low levels of competition (assuming there are any good
grads about,) and one likely unprepared should it decide to venture
out into the larger world. Finally, grads are still people, too. Since
your whole point is that you don't see why you should suddenly be
excluded from some events just because you're a little older and
cagier, well, why shouldn't grads get the same treatment?

Anyway, I hope that this allows us to put some of this to rest, or at
least to make some progress (maybe even beyond "DON'T TALK ABOUT MY
PROGRAM THAT WAY!")

MaS