My reply to Matt's questions: << Is it the place of the writer or editor to eliminate "grandstanding" or delay of the game by intentionally creating the risk of a correct answer being ruled incorrect, by not listing it? People who read a lot of packets have been known to give the full answer that's usually listed, including alternate answers and acronym expansions, upon hearing a familiar clue, before they even know what's coming out of their mouths. Should they, or even someone who is intentionally showing off, be penalized?>> My opinion: It is NOT the place of the writer or editor to eliminate an acceptable answer just because it's too long. I agree if at all possible, all acceptable alternate answers should be allowed to the discretion of the editor and writer. In fact, the writer should have complete responsibility to include all the relevant information that uniquely identifies an answer; this includes first, middle, and maiden names to a family name if the information is accessible. However, eliminating unsportsmanlike conduct or any behavior that undermines the academic environment or the proper adjudication of a match/tournament is under the perview of the tournament director and the officiating staff. If someone is intentionally showing off, a misconduct warning should be issued by the reader/moderator and upheld (if appealed when appropriate) by the tournament director.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST