2022 ICT general discussion

[Important Bird Area]

This is your general discussion thread for the 2022 NAQT ICT.

[eygotem]

Twas a good set (at least in D2), though some of the tossups felt very much like "this can only be one thing." Some examples from me and my teammate include the equilibrium tossup with "this state," and the autumn tossup in poetry. There also seemed to be a fair amount of difficulty swing in the bonuses (perhaps it's our spotty knowledge speaking). Overall, I was impressed with the questions and look forward to (hopefully) playing D1 next year.

[njoshi1]

I felt like the autumn tossup could've reasonably been another season, I just figured it was likely autumn than any other season. The tossups where I felt particularly strongly about this were "si, se puede" (were we supposed to have another idea in mind at "this spanish phrase"?) and "london and paris."

[benchapman]

For what it's worth, on the "Si, se puede" tossup, I was trying to remember how to say "We shall overcome" ("Nosotros venceremos") in Spanish for a while before the other team got it because I thought that could have been the answer. The answer space was certainly drastically shrunk by the pronoun, but there was still more than one answer to choose from.

[Gene Harrogate]

The DI set felt like one of the strongest NAQT sets I've played, maybe the strongest. There were few absurd, why-did-we-need-a-tossup-on-that kind of answerlines, and the set felt difficult without being a death march. Overall very good experience with the questions.

[Amizda Calyx]

I'm happy I finally got to reap real-world prestige from my brief, obnoxious 1400-word deep-dive into 1960s St Kilda footballer notability in a Wikipedia article deletion discussion...

Other notes: I thought the bio in this set was very strong, with a lot of interesting but accessible answerlines. The tournament overall was very well-run and didn't feel like it dragged on. The only complaints I really have are related to the NAQT format in general rather than anything particular to this ICT, so I think that's a pretty good endorsement of the quality of the set.

Thanks to all the writers and staffers!

[Valefor]

I want to thank Andrew Hart, Rob Carson, Matt Bollinger, and Billy Busse for all of their work on the DI set, and Jeff Hoppes and Seth Teitler for all of their work on the DII set. They put in a TON of work to make this question set what it was, and I think it showed.

Also, it's far too many people to list here, but another gigantic thank you to all the subject editors who worked on the various categories for the sets, and all the writers who contributed questions!

[Whiter Hydra]

I just wanted to say that I appreciated how some of the issues brought up at ICT were fixed in time for IPNCT the next day. That's a quick turnaround, especially given how hectic the weekend was!

[Aaron's Rod]

I just wanted to say that I appreciated how some of the issues brought up at ICT were fixed in time for IPNCT the next day. That's a quick turnaround, especially given how hectic the weekend was!

One of the advantages of not having paper packets! I was a skeptic, but I generally liked the question reading system at ICT.

[meebles127]

I just wanted to say that I appreciated how some of the issues brought up at ICT were fixed in time for IPNCT the next day. That's a quick turnaround, especially given how hectic the weekend was!

One of the advantages of not having paper packets! I was a skeptic, but I generally liked the question reading system at ICT.

I too was extremely skeptical of the online system. I'll take this of my opportunity to share just how immensely impressed I was by the online question system. Thanks to all who made this a wonderful weekend.

[matthewspatrick]

Adding to the chorus of game officials who were impressed by the OQS with integrated scorekeeping. It really made both aspects of officiating much, much easier, and I'd be content to never go back to paper again.

[jagluski]

The NAQT logistics team started meetings last summer to talk about “what we would like a perfect online question system to look like”. We then prioritized what was a must for this year and what could wait.

I would like to thank Rob Hentzel, Jonah Greenthal, Bernadette Spencer, Jessie Francis, and Nathan Murphy for all your work over the last year to get OQS to where it is today.