I'll apologize in advance for breaking my promise to myself not to get dragged into any post-mortems of the ACF Fall Tournaments, but a few statements in the ACF Issues post need to be addressed. 1) "By having plenty of DivII teams and awarding separate honors, you let them play on their own level and enjoy themselves as well." In the initial announcement for this set of tournaments, I stated that there would be separate Div II awards for both teams and individuals. In addition, I also explicitly informed hosts that this needed to be done, and as far as I can tell from the results posted in this forum, this was indeed done, with the result being more Div II teams in attendance and more Div II players enjoying themselves. Or did I miss something? 2) "ACF seems pretty intent to kill itself. There is no way for ACF to survive if the incoming generation continues to be treated like crap." Div II recognition was emphasized, in part to ensure that newer teams would have many games against players with similar levels of experience. The questions in this tournament were specifically tailored to be readily accessable to Div II players. It's good to know that the hundreds of hours spent editing these questions is perceived as grand scheme to treat newer players like crap. 3) "You can't have fun if all you're being allowed to do is hold a buzzer while some grognard is answering every question." Wow. How dare tournament editors and directors simply stop at allowing you to match your knowledge of academic subject matter against others. You know, I'm coming up speechless on this one, so I think I'l just allow the statement and its Harrison Bergeron implications speak for themselves. 4) "Grant ye, I didn't actually play or see anyone else play the tournament on Saturday" Prety well sums it up. Kelly McKenzie P.S. Who are you? You suprisingly failed to sign your name.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST