Re: This Tournament Goes to Eleven 2006 to be held the weekend of October 21.

danpassner <*DanPassner_at_danpassner.yahoo.invalid*> · Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:09:35 -0000

I generally go by a simple rule at this point: ""if you don't want 
people to call you out on shit, try hard not to produce shit." I 
call it Reid's Razor.

I learned that lesson through many mistakes and am still working on 
the latter part to it. Asinine posts suck, but so does spending $200 
year after year, as I'd imagine the UIUC team had done, to patronize 
your tournament, only to find it subpar.

I also wonder if you categorized q's like typhoid mary and the list 
tu on yarmulke as academic? Numbers can be jiggered around however 
one wants. Sudheer's (who the hell is he!?!?) post still maintains 
its assholey core validity, in my humble opinion.

But, its always good you put on an event with lots of packets each 
year, for that I do give you kudos. Put more time into the polish, 
and less into the audio round, and you might silence some of the so-
called "partisans."

Dan 

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, "dr_pookman" <dr_pookman_at_...> wrote:
>
> --- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, suds1000 <no_reply_at_> wrote:
> 
> Will TTGT11 2006 once again feature a disproportionate amount of
> trash, namely a percentage in each packet much higher than 
promised by
> the tournament director?
> 
> Will there again be an audio non-popular-country-music round in 
which
> each of the audio clips contains the answer to the question, 
resulting
> in teams buzzing off of no knowledge with random words in the song 
as
> their guess?
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Dear "suds1000",
> 
> First, let me say I in no way officially speak for the U of Iowa, 
> UIAQC, or in any capacity as a possible TD for the upcoming 
TTGT11; 
> but I wish I did.
> 
> TTGT11 is a hybrid tournament.  It has wholly trash and wholly 
> academic packets, and it also has packets that are a mix of the 
two.  
> Claiming that there is a "disproportionate amount of trash" in 
each 
> packet grossly misreports the basic format of the tournament.
> 
> In my experience, some players who like academic play much more 
than 
> they like trash play will openly bitch about the amount of trash 
at 
> TTGT11.  In contrast, some players who like trash much more than 
they 
> like to play academic quizbowl will openly bitch about the amount 
of 
> academic questions.
> 
> Players who enjoy their teammates, like being challenged, and 
aren't 
> complete fucking assholes usually just shut up and have a good 
time.
> 
> "suds1000", I do not care who you are, and I will not bother to 
look 
> into it, as my suggestions to you after reading your e-mail would 
> have been the same: 
> 
> 1) Go fuck yourself.
> 
> 2) If you have grievances with a particular tournament, and the TD 
of 
> that tournament asks for feedback, and you don't voice your 
> grievance, then you no earthly reason to bitch when what you see 
as a 
> problem isn't addressed.
> 
> 3) If you're going to post to this board, perhaps you'd do better 
to 
> make suggestions for the upcoming tournament, rather than bitch 
about 
> tournaments that were held 7-20 months ago.
> 
> 4) If you're going to make an accusation that there is 
> a "disproportionate amount of trash", please provide something to 
> back it up, as well as just what is 
constitutes "disproportionate".  
> 
> ====================
> 
> Let's look at point 4, shall we?  It'd be rude of me to tell you 
to 
> back something up without first attempting to myself, so I guess I 
> will.
> 
> I have unearthed to informational e-mails sent to teams that came 
to 
> TTGT11 the two years I was TD (2003 & 2004), which are very much 
the 
> same, as the second was generated from the first, and they both 
read:
> 
> "We were shooting for a 70/30 academic/TRASH tournament; hopefully 
> higher (75/25), but no lower than 60/40."
> 
> Looking into the UIAQC archives, this is what I find*:
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> TTGT11 2003 (TD: Andrew Juhl): 
> 
> w/o lightning rounds 13.5 academic and 10.5 trash packets, 
> or a 56/44 split 
> 
> w/ lightning rounds 15.9 academic and 11.1 trash packets, 
> or a 59/41 split
> 
> (You're right!  My distribution was off in 2003; thanks for 
telling 
> me now.  Kudos.)
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> TTGT11 2004 (TD: Andrew Juhl): 
> 
> w/o lightning rounds 20.0 academic and 12.0 trash packets,
> or a 63/37 split 
> 
> w/ lightning rounds 22.4 academic and 12.6 trash packets,
> or a 64/36 split
> 
> (A little close, but within what I promised.)
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> TTGT11 2005 (TD: Zach Sanderson): 
> 
> w/o lightning rounds 17.0 academic and 11.0 trash packets, 
> or a 61/39 split 
> 
> w/ lightning rounds 19.4 academic and 11.6 trash packets,
> or a 63/37 split
> 
> (Keeping the tradition alive!)
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> "suds1000", you are not a God_of_Quizbowl.  If you want to give 
> TTGT11 another chance, please feel free to come, and if you don't, 
> then don't.  I'm sure UIAQC will gladly take your registration 
fee, 
> either way.  They need to money to go to other tournament and HAVE 
> FUN.
> 
> After all, maybe you'll host a tournament soon, and the way you 
treat 
> your fellow quizbowlers sure as shit'll make me wanna be there.  
> *thumbs-up* 
> 
> ++Andrew R. Juhl
> (Once again, on his own behalf.)
> 
> *For the purposes of this e-mail, I figured a lightning round was 
a 
> packet long, and there are three lightning rounds at TTGT11.  My 
> lightning rounds were around 80/20 (academic/trash), which I 
> generalized to 2005's tournament.
>