Annotated Review of Packets

Old college threads.
Locked
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Cheynem »

Hey, after making the flippant joke in the RILKE thread about Blu-Ray special features for tournaments, I got to thinking about the quizbowl equivalent of commentary tracks. There's a packet on the archive which contains basically short, sometimes helpful commentaries and reviews of each question. At some point (when I actually finish the fershlugginer projects I'm working on), I'd like to get a panel/roundtable of folks and have a conversation as we look through a packet and try to draw out particular positive and negative trends. This is just a preliminary fishing idea if anyone has any other suggestions for this or willingness to participate; it probably will be in the late spring or early summer before it happens.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5993
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by theMoMA »

packets.genius.com

In all seriousness, sounds like fun! If I'm available, I'll participate.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum
User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4295
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Auks Ran Ova »

I'd be up for this.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??, BHSU forever
Member, ACF
Member emeritus, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT
User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 3145
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Auroni »

Same.
Auroni Gupta (she/her)
User avatar
Gautam
Auron
Posts: 1413
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:28 pm
Location: Zone of Avoidance
Contact:

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Gautam »

I think it'd be a great idea to approach this with a "what are editors looking for" angle, and work with raw submissions rather than final packets. There's still a gap between editor expectations of submissions and actual submissions - I don't think this is a controversial statement.

Recently we've put up some "sample packets" on the ACF website, for instance, which take from a couple of good submissions for 2014 Regionals. I don't know if it's immediately clear to the quizbowl world at large what makes those submissions good, or why they are to be emulated.

Just a thought. There's no paucity of raw material for this either. I'd be happy to contact some of the teams that submitted packets for Fall to see if they're okay with something like this.

-Gautam
Gautam - ACF
Currently tending to the 'quizbowl hobo' persuasion.
User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Auron
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

I'll gladly participate in this.

Doing this with both edited and unedited packets seems like a cool idea.

I don't think ACF Fall packets would be as useful for this exercise as would be regular-difficulty packets. Lower-difficulty packets tend to have few if any fresh early clues, and talking about how to phrase fresh early clues, and even what proportion of the tossup should be devoted to such clues, seems to me to be a vital part of this discussion. Also, most packet-submission tournaments are regular-difficulty, so it seems best to discuss exactly the sorts of packet submissions we most wish to improve.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '20

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Cheynem »

I think conceivably we could look at a variety of packets from different difficulties; it might be worthwhile to look at a Fall submission to (gently) note how the submission both does and does not match the spirit of the tournament.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

I don't know if I'm as qualified to participate in this as the people posting upthread, but I'd be interested in sitting in on this exercise and seeing what people think.

Also, I only see a single sample packet on the ACF website (Rob Carson's from ACF Regionals 2014) - are there others somewhere?
Will Alston
Dartmouth College '16
Columbia Business School '21
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

so would this be looking at editted packets or submissions?
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Sima Guang Hater »

I want to contribute
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Brown 2009, Penn Med 2018
Instructor/Attending Physician/Postdoctoral Fellow, Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Coach, University School of Nashville

“The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It’s one of the never-ending cycles in life.”
Support the Stevens-Johnson Syndrome Foundation
Magister Ludi
Tidus
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 1:57 am
Location: Washington DC

Re: Annotated Review of Packets

Post by Magister Ludi »

I would like to do this
Ted Gioia - Harvard '12
Editor ACF, PACE
Locked