Cheynem wrote:3. I hope we can agree that there are limits: Continually rotating pseudonyms should never be allowed, as these can prove very confusing for statskeepers, etc.
5. I think not using pseudonyms is helpful sometimes when TD's are attempting to form brackets or if teams are qualifying for national tournaments. In SC's case, it's pretty easy because they have a pretty set foursome, but if Blah Blah High School has like six major players who always play with pseudonyms, it can be difficult to know how to seed such team unless one has a deep familiarity with players.
3. How? I've used SQBS before. You just select someone from the dropdown menu and input their stats. It shouldn't matter that someone took someone else's pseudonym because you're doing the exact same thing as you would have if they didn't.
Arsonists Get All the Girls wrote:For the purpose of seeding, I'm not so sure how individual stats help. Typically, teams register by saying "We're bringing 2 teams, 2 buzzers, and 1 moderator," and the tournament director seeds as if they're bring their normal teams. This is because team composition (at least for a couple schools I know) can change a lot in the days leading up to a tournament. As a person registering for a tournament, I do not feel obligated to send up to the minute information on who exactly is going on what team. Thus, the difference between seeding team A with pseudonyms and team A without pseudonyms is 0.
The seeding issue only really matters for HSNCT or NSC and not much for local tournaments because team composition is always quite variable. Even in the case of HSNCT and NSC, I doubt knowing exactly who is on a team will affect their seeding too much except in extreme cases (like a Matt Jackson-less GDS or something) which could probably be resolved in another way.
myamphigory wrote:Pseudonyms in stats have the potential to make it more difficult to enforce eligibility restrictions on tournaments like Collegiate Novice (and, theoretically, SCT/ICT, though I haven't often seen people using pseudonyms at NAQT events). For me, that's enough reason to eschew them.
Eh, I don't think that's a real issue right now. I think most teams in the quizbowl have enough common decency to not cheat our way into winning collegiate novice (and, theoretically, SCT/ICT). It's probably not in the best interests of quizbowl to preemptively eliminate all possible Basilius II's when there isn't really a threat of one now.
Fred wrote:Pseudonyms for their own sake are awfully silly and actually harmful in a minor, limited way, both with Susan's point above and for people trying to seed tournaments based off past results. Also, if you're trying to run a tournament and care about looking professional, like at one of the major nationals, having pseudonyms looks dumb.
Pseudonyms at nationals should be eschewed, but the "awfully silly" argument is awfully silly. You shouldn't stop someone from doing something just because you don't think it's funny or think that it's lame. If you do, you could get into all sorts of tyrannical abuses of the awfully silly clause and start doing stuff like banning stuffed animals from being on someone's desk or telling people not to where neon pink shirts.
I think this is all being blown out of proportion. This isn't the scourge plaguing the quizbowl community. It's a couple of isolated teams doing something fun. There has been no surge in pseudonym activity. There have been no issues thus far with people using pseudonyms. Can we stop trying to make up problems that don't exist right now?