talk about individual questions here

Old college threads.
User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Auks Ran Ova » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:05 am

magin wrote:
setht wrote:
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote: More complaints:
Packet 2:
-Countee Cullen: Why on earth was "The Ballad of the Little Brown Girl" not in this tossup?
Cullen: because I thought Copper Sun and The Black Christ (and Harlem Renaissance poet who is presumably not Langston Hughes) were sufficient. Is Ballad head and shoulders above the rest of Cullen's ouevre or something?
Eric, I think your ire is misplaced here. The Ballad of the Brown Girl (not the little brown girl) is, to my knowledge, not more well-known than other Cullen titles (especially some of his individual poems like "Yet Do I Marvel," which I think undergrads are most likely to read/learn about). Also, I don't think it's useful to criticize questions for not including one specific clue, unless that clue is necessary for that question to be converted at an acceptable level; as Jerry said in a different thread, there are a multiplicity of possible good questions that can be written on a topic, not just one good question.
I agree with the general point about criticizing questions for missing certain clues, but this specific instance did give me pause--I was expecting something like "Yet Do I Marvel" or "The Ballad of the Brown Girl" at the end, and when neither one was forthcoming I was markedly less sure of my own buzz. I'll definitely admit that I'm no Cullen expert, but the lack of what I thought were his most famous individual works struck me as odd.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Auks Ran Ova » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:11 am

Sam Gafkjen wrote:Alright, inexperienced moderator question. DII, packet 4 bonus part:
Édouard Lalo composed this violin concerto for Spanish virtuoso Pablo de Sarasate.
answer: _Symphonie espagnole_
Captain: "Spanish Symphony."
Me: *hesitates*
Captain: [sub-1s pause] "Uh, Symphonie espagnole."

I wound up ruling that "Symphonie espagnole" was not making "Spanish Symphony" more specific (so I could only judge the correctness of "Spanish Symphony"), that "Spanish Symphony" was not an acceptable answer, and that the team absolutely should protest this ruling if it could matter (it didn't).

Based solely on the information I had in front of me and the NAQT rules, was this the right call? Does this change if I actually know something about the topic at hand?
I don't think there's any way that that's the right call; for one thing, upon being prompted the player provided the exact answer that was on the page. As for the promptability of the original given answer, here's what the NAQT correctness guidelines say: "Titles and names in the original language of the answer are generally acceptable unless specifically disallowed by the question. English titles under which translations have been published will also be accepted[.]" The existence of http://www.amazon.com/Lalo-Symphony-Sai ... B0002DRBTI alone should make the player's original answer not merely promptable, but acceptable and correct.

This seems like another instance where more thoroughness in completing answer lines (on NAQT's part) would've entirely circumvented this problem.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

User avatar
Pilgrim
Tidus
Posts: 637
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:20 pm
Location: Edmonton

Re: Critique Jonah's questions

Post by Pilgrim » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:19 am

Ukonvasara wrote:
bt_green_warbler wrote:
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:-Ludendorf: I don't know enough about this one, but Chris negged with Hindenberg. Maybe there's an issue?
He took command of the 14th Brigade after its leader was killed and soon forced the surrender of Liege. Along with Max Hoffman, he was sent to assist General Prittwitz's replacement and planned the battles of the Masurian Lakes and Lodz in late 1914. After Erich von (*) Falkenhayn's resignation he planned Operation Michael, the German assault on the Western Front in 1918, along with his partner Paul von Hindenburg. For 10 points--name this German general who took part in the Beer Hall Putsch.
Hindenburg is wrong from clue one, although I could imagine players becoming confused by the description of Hindenburg before he is named.
Yeah, I buzzed on "Falkenhayn's resignation" with Hindenburg; I certainly don't doubt the legitimacy and uniqueness of the other clues (which, obviously, I didn't recognize or know), but that one is a bit confusing.
I guess that clue could have been worded differently, but the rest of that clause doesn't at all apply to Hindenburg. So, I guess, you have to be willing to risk the consequences if you try to buzz on a partial clue.
Trevor Davis
University of Alberta
CMU '11

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6615
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Cheynem » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:21 am

Detailed answer lines are always good. I'm not supremely sure on the rules regarding "FIRST ANSWER ONLY," but it also seems like readers should be encouraged that within reason, to take answers delivered in this manner--it seems like the captain knew what he/she was talking about and was trying to clarify an answer, not just abruptly change the answer to something completely different or shotgun several guesses.

Answer lines should always be written with the mindset that the reader has no idea regarding alternate answers, quite frankly even when it seems pretty obvious what to accept and what not to accept. Some readers tend to skew the liberal approach and some the ultra conservative approach. Also, question writers/editors should realize that while in most cases, readers are genuinely confused and want to do the right thing, there are the 10% of dick readers who get their jollies by enforcing technicalities and are empowered to do so with vague answer lines.

EDIT: Let me certainly clarify that I don't think the person who asked that question is a dick. I'm sure/he was attempting to do the right thing and I am not maligning them. But I have run into the nefarious types.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: Critique Jonah's questions

Post by Auks Ran Ova » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:24 am

Pilgrim wrote:
Ukonvasara wrote:
bt_green_warbler wrote:
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:-Ludendorf: I don't know enough about this one, but Chris negged with Hindenberg. Maybe there's an issue?
He took command of the 14th Brigade after its leader was killed and soon forced the surrender of Liege. Along with Max Hoffman, he was sent to assist General Prittwitz's replacement and planned the battles of the Masurian Lakes and Lodz in late 1914. After Erich von (*) Falkenhayn's resignation he planned Operation Michael, the German assault on the Western Front in 1918, along with his partner Paul von Hindenburg. For 10 points--name this German general who took part in the Beer Hall Putsch.
Hindenburg is wrong from clue one, although I could imagine players becoming confused by the description of Hindenburg before he is named.
Yeah, I buzzed on "Falkenhayn's resignation" with Hindenburg; I certainly don't doubt the legitimacy and uniqueness of the other clues (which, obviously, I didn't recognize or know), but that one is a bit confusing.
I guess that clue could have been worded differently, but the rest of that clause doesn't at all apply to Hindenburg. So, I guess, you have to be willing to risk the consequences if you try to buzz on a partial clue.
I'm also entirely willing to admit that I was basically just rolling the dice there and assuming that the moderately-more-famous member of the pair, whose name I could remember at the time, was going to be the answer. The question's basically fine and not really at fault here; I was just confirming that some confusion could and did result.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5518
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Important Bird Area » Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:29 am

DLSqb10 wrote:There was a bonus in the DII set about Egypt, it was like Sadat, Mahfouz, ElBaradei. I'm pretty sure that was the same exact bonus from 2 or 3 years ago. There also seemed to be a lot of repeats from round to round, maybe that's just me.
2011 DII SCT, round 8 wrote:For 10 points each--name these Egyptian Nobel laureates:

A. In 1978 this Egyptian president became the first to win a Nobel, sharing the Peace Prize with Menachem Begin.

answer: (Muhammad) Anwar el-_Sadat_ (or Anwar as-_Sadat_)

B. The only Egyptian winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature is this author of the ~Cairo~ trilogy.

answer: Naguib _Mahfouz_

C. In 2005 the Nobel Peace Prize was split between the International Atomic Energy Agency and this Egyptian man, its president.

answer: Mohammed _ElBaradei_
2008 DII SCT, round 15 wrote:For 10 points each--name these Nobel prize winners who hail from Egypt:

A. He won the Peace prize for signing the Camp David Accords three years before his 1981 assassination.

answer: (Mohammad) Anwar Al-_Sadat_

B. This author of ~The Thief and the Dogs~ and the ~Cairo~ trilogy was awarded the Literature prize in 1988.

answer: Naguib _Mahfouz_

C. This current Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency won the 2005 Peace prize for his nuclear nonproliferation efforts, though the U.S. has accused him of leniency with Iran.

answer: Mohamad _ElBaradei_
Two different writers and editors, for the record.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

Steve Watchorn
Lulu
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: Nashua, NH
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Steve Watchorn » Tue Feb 08, 2011 5:53 am

The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:
-Ligands: This one was frustrating. In the first line, you're describing the crystal field splitting parameter (or ligand field splitting parameter), and saying "a splitting parameter associated with these entities". I buzzed in an said "d orbitals" because the ligand field splitting parameter is the difference in energy between two sets of d orbitals.
I originated this question, and it went through more-or-less without any modifications, so I am responsible for it. I can only point to it as the dangers of writing science out of one's field of expertise. Though my sources do mention the field splitting parameter as measuring the disturbance between the degeneracy of d-orbitals, I did not think of the possibility of how you read the wording of the question, which is completely reasonable (there was some internal discussion as to whether "the field" should have been added to the phrase you quoted, but it was thought that would make things too transparent; again, none of us apparently thought of other ways that phrase could be reasonably read). A little more experience (or time for me to reflect on the question) might have helped eliminate the ambiguity.
Steve Watchorn
University of Michigan CBI Team 1991
University of Wisconsin - Madison Quiz Bowl 1995-2001
NAQT contributor (and often available for others as well)

Ethnic history of the Vilnius region
Yuna
Posts: 974
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 12:50 am
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Critique Jonah's questions

Post by Ethnic history of the Vilnius region » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:13 am

The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:
Jeremy Gibbs Freesy Does It wrote:Eric, moderators who are not experts can't possibly know when they're being lenient enough and when they're being too lenient. At this event where being too lenient could be the difference between a team getting a bid to nationals or not, it is unreasonable to expect most moderators to go along with some sort of gut feeling about what should be right, especially when some number of them are probably random ACUI staff. We need to drive home to NAQT that they need to be incredibly thorough in their answerlines, rather than complain about moderators not overriding the packet.
Yes, you are right. But the answerline in question did say [accept word forms], and this was not a first-time moderator. I wouldn't be nearly as mad otherwise; the staff at Moravian were a kind and well-meaning bunch, and did a very good job hosting. In any case, this kind of issue is best brought up in other contexts.
Ah, I didn't know it allowed word forms to be acceptable.
Eric D.
University of South Carolina Alum

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:28 am

Ukonvasara wrote:
magin wrote:
setht wrote:
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote: More complaints:
Packet 2:
-Countee Cullen: Why on earth was "The Ballad of the Little Brown Girl" not in this tossup?
Cullen: because I thought Copper Sun and The Black Christ (and Harlem Renaissance poet who is presumably not Langston Hughes) were sufficient. Is Ballad head and shoulders above the rest of Cullen's ouevre or something?
Eric, I think your ire is misplaced here. The Ballad of the Brown Girl (not the little brown girl) is, to my knowledge, not more well-known than other Cullen titles (especially some of his individual poems like "Yet Do I Marvel," which I think undergrads are most likely to read/learn about). Also, I don't think it's useful to criticize questions for not including one specific clue, unless that clue is necessary for that question to be converted at an acceptable level; as Jerry said in a different thread, there are a multiplicity of possible good questions that can be written on a topic, not just one good question.
I agree with the general point about criticizing questions for missing certain clues, but this specific instance did give me pause--I was expecting something like "Yet Do I Marvel" or "The Ballad of the Brown Girl" at the end, and when neither one was forthcoming I was markedly less sure of my own buzz. I'll definitely admit that I'm no Cullen expert, but the lack of what I thought were his most famous individual works struck me as odd.
FWIW, we failed to convert this question because we'd only read "Yet Do I Marvel" and "Incident."
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by grapesmoker » Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:39 am

Steve Watchorn wrote:
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:
-Ligands: This one was frustrating. In the first line, you're describing the crystal field splitting parameter (or ligand field splitting parameter), and saying "a splitting parameter associated with these entities". I buzzed in an said "d orbitals" because the ligand field splitting parameter is the difference in energy between two sets of d orbitals.
I originated this question, and it went through more-or-less without any modifications, so I am responsible for it. I can only point to it as the dangers of writing science out of one's field of expertise. Though my sources do mention the field splitting parameter as measuring the disturbance between the degeneracy of d-orbitals, I did not think of the possibility of how you read the wording of the question, which is completely reasonable (there was some internal discussion as to whether "the field" should have been added to the phrase you quoted, but it was thought that would make things too transparent; again, none of us apparently thought of other ways that phrase could be reasonably read). A little more experience (or time for me to reflect on the question) might have helped eliminate the ambiguity.
I've gone on at length in other contexts about the evils of the word "associated." I think it's best to avoid using words like that because they lead to a multiplicity of possible answers and engender great confusion.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

samer
Wakka
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by samer » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:36 pm

Ukonvasara wrote:
Sam Gafkjen wrote:Alright, inexperienced moderator question. DII, packet 4 bonus part:
Édouard Lalo composed this violin concerto for Spanish virtuoso Pablo de Sarasate.
answer: _Symphonie espagnole_
Captain: "Spanish Symphony."
Me: *hesitates*
Captain: [sub-1s pause] "Uh, Symphonie espagnole."

I wound up ruling that "Symphonie espagnole" was not making "Spanish Symphony" more specific (so I could only judge the correctness of "Spanish Symphony"), that "Spanish Symphony" was not an acceptable answer, and that the team absolutely should protest this ruling if it could matter (it didn't).

Based solely on the information I had in front of me and the NAQT rules, was this the right call? Does this change if I actually know something about the topic at hand?
I don't think there's any way that that's the right call; for one thing, upon being prompted the player provided the exact answer that was on the page. As for the promptability of the original given answer, here's what the NAQT correctness guidelines say: "Titles and names in the original language of the answer are generally acceptable unless specifically disallowed by the question. English titles under which translations have been published will also be accepted[.]" The existence of http://www.amazon.com/Lalo-Symphony-Sai ... B0002DRBTI alone should make the player's original answer not merely promptable, but acceptable and correct.

This seems like another instance where more thoroughness in completing answer lines (on NAQT's part) would've entirely circumvented this problem.
To be fair, in looking back at this question, a search of the Library of Congress catalog was done, and turned up zero hits for "Spanish Symphony."
samer dot ismail -at- gmail dot com / Samer Ismail, PACE co-founder, NAQT editor

User avatar
MicroEStudent
Rikku
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:20 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by MicroEStudent » Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:05 pm

A small note from Packet 5 for "Spanish teacher," Kathy Najimy voices Peggy Hill, she is not the Spanish teacher herself. The phrase "Kathy Najimy substitutes as one in Arlen, Texas" seems to be non-ideal.
Nathaniel Kane
RIT '09, '11 (BS Microelectronic Engineering, MS Microelectronic Engineering)

yoda4554
Rikku
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by yoda4554 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:14 am

Judy Sucks a Lemon for Breakfast wrote:There was a Greensleeves tossup (in DII) that said that the song was used in the Intermezzo of St. Paul's Suite, which is incorrect as it's actually in the Dargason fourth movement. I buzzed in on that clue and got confused, leading to a neg.
I was trying to figure out how this happened--as it turns out, my Holst CD managed to both mislabel and reverse the order of the last two movements of the suite. Apologies. (And here I thought the whole time that Holst was being different by ending on the slow movement...)
Dave Letzler--Williams '06, Temple '08, CUNY and bastard teams '12ish

User avatar
Golran
Auron
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Southern California

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Golran » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:10 pm

Can you post the text of the question on constructors from DI round 4 TU 8 please? I'm not sure if I misheard a clue regarding single colons which I had thought were used to declare derived classes, and not constructors.
Drayer the Slayer
currently unaffiliated

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5518
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Important Bird Area » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:21 pm

round 4 wrote:C# allows "static" examples of these entities to initialize static data members. In C++ they can have a colon-separated "initializer list" and they may not call virtual functions. In both languages--as well as in Java--they run after those of parent classes, have no (*) return type, and share their names with that of their class. The abbreviation "ctor" is shorthand for--for 10 points--what kind of routine that initializes a newly created object and which is contrasted with a "destructor"?

answer: _constructor_ (prompt on "ctor" early)
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:44 pm

I can confirm that C++ clue. You're right about the use of the single colons with respect to derived classes (and not to constructors or, in fact, other methods, which work like Class::Method()) but that's not this.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
Golran
Auron
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Southern California

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Golran » Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:51 pm

Right, I heard "single colon separated", not just colon separated, which caused me to buzz.
Drayer the Slayer
currently unaffiliated

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:26 pm

Golran wrote:Right, I heard "single colon separated", not just colon separated, which caused me to buzz.
Well, the list of variables being initialized to values in a constructor is separated by a single colon. So even were it phrased that way, your buzz is incorrect.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by grapesmoker » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:50 pm

Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:
Golran wrote:Right, I heard "single colon separated", not just colon separated, which caused me to buzz.
Well, the list of variables being initialized to values in a constructor is separated by a single colon. So even were it phrased that way, your buzz is incorrect.
I have to say that I'm really not a fan of questions like this. The notation that a colon separates the initialization list in C++ and Java is an utterly unremarkable fact about constructors. It's a bit like giving clues in a physics question about what is used to symbolize what quantities; nothing depends on the wave function being denoted by psi, it's just convention, and likewise programming language notation is not a particularly important thing. I think clues like this should really not be used; if you're finding yourself unable to write a CS question without resorting to such a clue, you're probably doing it wrong.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:58 pm

grapesmoker wrote:
Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:
Golran wrote:Right, I heard "single colon separated", not just colon separated, which caused me to buzz.
Well, the list of variables being initialized to values in a constructor is separated by a single colon. So even were it phrased that way, your buzz is incorrect.
I have to say that I'm really not a fan of questions like this. The notation that a colon separates the initialization list in C++ and Java is an utterly unremarkable fact about constructors. It's a bit like giving clues in a physics question about what is used to symbolize what quantities; nothing depends on the wave function being denoted by psi, it's just convention, and likewise programming language notation is not a particularly important thing. I think clues like this should really not be used; if you're finding yourself unable to write a CS question without resorting to such a clue, you're probably doing it wrong.
I do agree about that in general; I think that a CS distribution that requires such clues (though--I do think it's possible to write an SCT-level tossup on constructors without such a clue) is too big.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by grapesmoker » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:14 am

Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:I do agree about that in general; I think that a CS distribution that requires such clues (though--I do think it's possible to write an SCT-level tossup on constructors without such a clue) is too big.
No CS distribution requires these clues. It's just a poorly written question, is all.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:29 am

grapesmoker wrote:
Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:I do agree about that in general; I think that a CS distribution that requires such clues (though--I do think it's possible to write an SCT-level tossup on constructors without such a clue) is too big.
No CS distribution requires these clues. It's just a poorly written question, is all.
One too big to hit a target difficulty definitely would (because you would just run out of difficulty-appropriate answer- and cluespace), right?
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
Unicolored Jay
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:28 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Unicolored Jay » Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:46 pm

Another factual error that may or may not have been brought up already: In the DII set packet 7 tossup 2, the sharps in the key of B minor and D major are F# and C#, not G# and C#. Otherwise, it's not a minor key and it's in some other mode.
Jasper Lee
University of Tennessee
The Ohio State University '14
Solon High School '10

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by DumbJaques » Fri Feb 18, 2011 10:49 am

He took command of the 14th Brigade after its leader was killed and soon forced the surrender of Liege. Along with Max Hoffman, he was sent to assist General Prittwitz's replacement and planned the battles of the Masurian Lakes and Lodz in late 1914. After Erich von (*) Falkenhayn's resignation he planned Operation Michael, the German assault on the Western Front in 1918, along with his partner Paul von Hindenburg. For 10 points--name this German general who took part in the Beer Hall Putsch.
I actually don't know if I understand Jeff's rationale at all. I didn't know the first clue, which presumably applies only to Ludendorff. But the next line is confusing as all hell. I buzzed on "assist General Pritt" and said "Hindenberg;" it's clear from the text that the clue "General Prittwitz's replacement" is actually referring to Hindenberg, but I think this could have been worded much better. Both of those guys planned Masurian Lakes, Lodz, and Operation Michael, and Hindenberg was more ostensibly the guy in charge (though it's my understanding not actually the greater tactician). There's plenty of potential for someone who didn't know the first clue (ie everyone hearing clues 2-5) or didn't hear/didn't know the Prittwitz's replacement thing to get really confused here. I'd like to have seen that second sentence begin with something like "Along with Max Hoffman, he assisted a man who replaced General Prittwitz. . ." Then again, I'm not the world's biggest WWI buff, so perhaps I'm mistaken about this.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5518
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: talk about individual questions here

Post by Important Bird Area » Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:20 pm

DumbJaques wrote:I'd like to have seen that second sentence begin with something like "Along with Max Hoffman, he assisted a man who replaced General Prittwitz. . ."
That would have been clearer and less confusing; my apologies.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

Locked