On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Old college threads.
Locked
User avatar
BuzzerZen
Auron
Posts: 1517
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: Arlington, VA/Hampshire College
Contact:

On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by BuzzerZen »

My somewhat acrimonious remarks in the leaving early thread sparked a bit of a side discussion which I think deserves its own thread. I have asserted, without much defense, the following axiom of tournament organization on multiple occasions over the years: never run a tournament for which you lack sufficient competent moderators. I feel like I should explain, sans unprovoked rancor, the various reasons why I firmly believe this to be the first principle of putting on a good event, and what it is that competent moderators contribute to the experience of a quiz bowl tourname[*]nt.

First of all, Jerry disputed this axiom with reference to EFT in the other thread. I would say that I think that Jerry, in running EFT at Brown, adhered to the axiom about as firmly as it is possible to do. He placed a cap on the field size when he determined that adding more teams would cause the quality of each team's experience to diminish. This is precisely the sort of behavior that I mean to promote by promulgating this axiom. He may have been recalling to some comments I made post-EFT about a couple mediocre moderators. For the record, I didn't think any of the moderators at EFT were incompetent. More on this distinction below. I'm not trying to mandate some exacting standard of quality here, just one that I view as a minimum.

A moderator should meet the following criteria to be characterized as competent:

- A competent moderator has played quiz bowl before. Could have been just once, could have been only in practice. But anyone moderating for a quiz bowl tournament needs to know what it feels like to play a quiz bowl match and know the various unspoken assumptions governing moderator behavior. I recall an older gentleman who read at Gonzaga tournaments who, after finishing tossups, would occasionally reread clues from the end or provide clues of his own, encouraging the players to pick up the points. Generally older gentlemen are not in the moderator recruiting pool for collegiate events, but I mean to illustrate the point that people who are less than experienced with quiz bowl can be unaware of important aspects of how the game is meant to operate.

- A competent moderator knows the rules, and, most importantly from an operational standpoint, knows how to handle wrong answers and protests. Meek roommates who have been dragged into a tournament on a Saturday morning and briefed hastily on the rules are not going to know what to do when Jerry Vinokurov first-lines a poorly-written tossup on "Ilf and Petrov" and says The Twelve Chairs. "The answer to this question isn't The Twelve Chairs," your roommate will think. "It's Ilf and Petrov." Jerry will get an undeserved neg, and by the time your roommate reads the words "...in this author's The Twelve Chairs," Jerry will be throwing chairs all over the place. [1] Your roommate will then have to deal with a protest from Jerry Vinokurov which your roommate probably does not quite know how to handle. Whereas you, a competent and experienced moderator, know when unspecified early answers ought to be acceptable, you know when answer lines are excessively underlined, you know how to ignore angry and vengeful players and continue reading the damn packet, and you know to just call an answer wrong when your own knowledge is too uncertain to make up for a sketchy answer line. Protests are the great healer.

- A competent moderator can fake their way through science words and foreign languages. This is, of course, a skill that takes development. The only foreign language I know is Spanish, and I'm fair-to-middling at parsing through polysyllabic organic compounds. But at this point in my quiz bowl career, I've got enough experience to deal with foreign names in what I hope is a reasonably non-distressing fashion. Inexperienced moderators usually will often try six or times to pronounce foreign names and come out with something garbled and confusing. [2] This is one area of moderator competence that probably goes away with experience, so I'm not going to say it's a total deal-breaker, but we've all had the experience of trying to figure out what the fuck word it was somebody just said.

- A competent moderator can shut people up. This is the talented Mr. Weiner's most harped-upon point vis a vis tournament efficiency, and I agree that it is critical to making things run smoothly. Certain players, like myself, are prone to meaningless post-tossup posturing. [3] Others will just chat between questions for no reason. Moderators must get these players to shut up, and the easiest way to do this is to continue reading questions. A more difficult situation arises when a team wishes to converse during another team's bonus. This calls for the advanced technique of snapping one's fingers disapprovingly while continuing to read the bonus.

- Finally, and perhaps most contentiously, a competent moderator can read quickly and coherently. Much has been said on the topic of speed. I will note only that it is coherent speed, above all else, that takes practice. (The question of ideal moderating speed is really secondary to the question of how long it takes to get through a round, which will be discussed below.)

These are what I would consider the minimum requirements for a moderator to be considered competent and fit for moderating a collegiate quiz bowl tournament. My next post will endeavor to illustrate why even one moderator who is significantly deficient in terms of competence can seriously damage the enjoyment of a tournament for some or all teams. I have to go from where I am now, but I'll be following up on this tonight, hopefully, or, if not, tomorrow. Feel free to discuss in the meantime.


Notes:
1. I do not mean to suggest that Jerry V. would actually throw chairs. Jerry V. is an even-tempered and well-meaning individual.
2. Some moderators struggle through uncommon domestic words. I believe the general ACF prescription of book-reading applies.
3. A fairly significant personal failing, I will acknowledge, but quiz bowl is my only competitive outlet, and if I can't posture here, I don't know where I'm gonna do it.
Evan Silberman
Hampshire College 07F

How are you actually reading one of my posts?

User avatar
at your pleasure
Auron
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:56 pm

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by at your pleasure »

Prehaps what is needed are more oppurtunites for inexperience to practice and improve their moderating skills outside of tournaments.
Douglas Graebner, Walt Whitman HS 10, Uchicago 14
"... imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid."-Sir James Frazer,The Golden Bough

http://avorticistking.wordpress.com/

User avatar
Matthew D
Yuna
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: Scenic Grant Alabama

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Matthew D »

I would second that point, by taking the added pressure off and allowing for practice, those that want to become better will become better
Matt Dennis
Coach DAR Quizbowl Team

User avatar
Terrible Shorts Depot
Yuna
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:05 pm
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Terrible Shorts Depot »

BuzzerZen wrote:2. Some moderators struggle through uncommon domestic words. I believe the general ACF prescription of book-reading applies
I usually don't venture into the college section, but this struck me. Reading alone will not allow you to pronounce words with more ease. You may see the word and go "Oh, hey, I know that word", but that alone does not guarantee perfection. An example: my freshman year, I was quizzing Andy on author work pairings. I come to Faust and, though he gave the correct answer of Goethe, I told him that he was wrong. Why? Because I assumed that Goethe was pronounced "GOTH" or something like that. Another example: just the other day, a very well read friend of mine used "inchoate" in conversation. She pronounced it "in-CHOTE", as opposed to "in-KO-ate". Basically, reading the word, however many times, does not lead to having the ability to pronounce it.

I agreed with just about everything else in the post, though.
Charlie Rosenthal
Shady Side Academy '09
Carleton College '13
University of Pennsylvania '18

User avatar
Marble-faced Bristle Tyrant
Yuna
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:05 pm
Location: Evanston, IL

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Marble-faced Bristle Tyrant »

Anti-Climacus wrote:Prehaps what is needed are more oppurtunites for inexperience to practice and improve their moderating skills outside of tournaments.
Rotate readers during practice so everyone gets the opportunity to practice playing and reading. Finish a packet, go to the next player.
la2pgh wrote:
BuzzerZen wrote:2. Some moderators struggle through uncommon domestic words. I believe the general ACF prescription of book-reading applies
I usually don't venture into the college section, but this struck me. Reading alone will not allow you to pronounce words with more ease. You may see the word and go "Oh, hey, I know that word", but that alone does not guarantee perfection. An example: my freshman year, I was quizzing Andy on author work pairings. I come to Faust and, though he gave the correct answer of Goethe, I told him that he was wrong. Why? Because I assumed that Goethe was pronounced "GOTH" or something like that. Another example: just the other day, a very well read friend of mine used "inchoate" in conversation. She pronounced it "in-CHOTE", as opposed to "in-KO-ate". Basically, reading the word, however many times, does not lead to having the ability to pronounce it.
It seems to me that reading during practice gives one the opportunity to learn how to pronounce stuff, as long as you don't get all defensive when your teammates correct you. I generally try to repeat the correct pronunciations after I am told them so that I can better remember them. In my own experience, 'Haydn' and 'larynx' come to mind. Your Goethe and inchoate examples were good opportunities for you and your friend to learn how to pronounce those words so that you would likely know better next time. And I say better that you learn during practice than during a match at a tournament.

Now, if only Firefox's spellcheck would lead me to spelling 'opportunity' correctly...

fsb
Farrah Bilimoria
Formerly of Georgia Tech and Central High School (Macon)

User avatar
BuzzerZen
Auron
Posts: 1517
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: Arlington, VA/Hampshire College
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by BuzzerZen »

la2pgh wrote:
BuzzerZen wrote:2. Some moderators struggle through uncommon domestic words. I believe the general ACF prescription of book-reading applies
I usually don't venture into the college section, but this struck me. Reading alone will not allow you to pronounce words with more ease. You may see the word and go "Oh, hey, I know that word", but that alone does not guarantee perfection. An example: my freshman year, I was quizzing Andy on author work pairings. I come to Faust and, though he gave the correct answer of Goethe, I told him that he was wrong. Why? Because I assumed that Goethe was pronounced "GOTH" or something like that. Another example: just the other day, a very well read friend of mine used "inchoate" in conversation. She pronounced it "in-CHOTE", as opposed to "in-KO-ate". Basically, reading the word, however many times, does not lead to having the ability to pronounce it.
I am, of course, well aware of this phenomenon. It's screwed me up on plenty of occasions. My point was more that being exposed to a wider vocabulary to begin with improves the odds that one will have a clue of how to pronounce something.
Evan Silberman
Hampshire College 07F

How are you actually reading one of my posts?

User avatar
Skepticism and Animal Feed
Auron
Posts: 3195
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Skepticism and Animal Feed »

BuzzerZen wrote: My point was more that being exposed to a wider vocabulary to begin with improves the odds that one will have a clue of how to pronounce something.
Without the eventual introduction of information on how words are pronounced, this does not follow at all.
Bruce
Harvard '10 / UChicago '07 / Roycemore School '04
ACF Member emeritus
My guide to using Wikipedia as a question source

User avatar
Skepticism and Animal Feed
Auron
Posts: 3195
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Skepticism and Animal Feed »

As for Silberman's Axiom itself, I will oppose it on the grounds of distributive justice. I can think of no rule better suited to ensure that smaller, newer programs are unable to raise money and get themselves off the ground.
Bruce
Harvard '10 / UChicago '07 / Roycemore School '04
ACF Member emeritus
My guide to using Wikipedia as a question source

User avatar
at your pleasure
Auron
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:56 pm

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by at your pleasure »

BuzzerZen wrote:
My point was more that being exposed to a wider vocabulary to begin with improves the odds that one will have a clue of how to pronounce something.
I've had the misfortune of managing to disprove that pretty throughly.
Douglas Graebner, Walt Whitman HS 10, Uchicago 14
"... imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid."-Sir James Frazer,The Golden Bough

http://avorticistking.wordpress.com/

cdcarter
Yuna
Posts: 945
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:06 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by cdcarter »

Whig's Boson wrote:As for Silberman's Axiom itself, I will oppose it on the grounds of distributive justice. I can think of no rule better suited to ensure that smaller, newer programs are unable to raise money and get themselves off the ground.
You do realize you have essentially said that newer programs should be allowed to hold really badly run tournaments.
Christian Carter
Minneapolis South High School '09 | Emerson College '13
PACE Member (retired)

powerplant
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by powerplant »

cdcarter wrote:
Whig's Boson wrote:As for Silberman's Axiom itself, I will oppose it on the grounds of distributive justice. I can think of no rule better suited to ensure that smaller, newer programs are unable to raise money and get themselves off the ground.
You do realize you have essentially said that newer programs should be allowed to hold really badly run tournaments.
I agree with Bruce though. At Centre, there are three people with "real" quizbowl experience, and one of them doesn't even play. I don't see how my school, which is rather isolated from a pool of highly talented moderators. Under the axiom, Centre would be hosting a tournament with a field capped at around 8 to 12, and unable to field a house team.
Joseph Wells

Garfield Heights High School '08
Centre College 2008-2010
Tri-C 2010-2011
Ohio State 2011-

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 3052
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Urbana

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Auroni »

I think Silberman's axiom is incredibly well-intentioned, but feasible only for programs that a) have several years of tournament-hosting experience under their belts and b) have a way of getting only competent moderators to staff a medium to large tournament. For programs that are emerging (or reemerging as the case may be), adherence to this axiom is either impossible or so difficult to achieve so as to be a hindrance. I really think that programs should get their feet wet by hosting a tournament, following very general guidelines (for example, I love bringing up cutting the chatter as something nearly every moderator could do that helps greatly), and getting used to contingency planning as teams drop out, matches take forever, and the entire gamut of things TDs are accustomed to facing. This will get them to adapt to their circumstances for the time being so that when they have the resources, implementation of Silberman's axiom can finally be observed without putting aside anything else.
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

"Slaves aren't people lmao." - Ike Jose

User avatar
Skepticism and Animal Feed
Auron
Posts: 3195
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Skepticism and Animal Feed »

cdcarter wrote:
Whig's Boson wrote:As for Silberman's Axiom itself, I will oppose it on the grounds of distributive justice. I can think of no rule better suited to ensure that smaller, newer programs are unable to raise money and get themselves off the ground.
You do realize you have essentially said that newer programs should be allowed to hold really badly run tournaments.
I think prohibiting newer teams from hosting tournaments is a greater evil than new programs hosting "really badly run tournaments". New teams need money and experience more than any other kind of team does. By denying them the ability to host tournaments, you are denying them the ability to interact with mainstream quizbowl, both by hosting and by attending (otherwise where is the money from attending going to come from?)

I mean, when somebody signs up to play ACF Fall or EFT at Random State University, who has never had a team in recent memory, I don't think anyone reasonably expects it to be the best run tournament ever. But the promise of Random State teams coming to your own tournaments later, and contributing to quizbowl for many years to come is such that I think most good natured teams would want to attend anyway.
Bruce
Harvard '10 / UChicago '07 / Roycemore School '04
ACF Member emeritus
My guide to using Wikipedia as a question source

User avatar
BuzzerZen
Auron
Posts: 1517
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: Arlington, VA/Hampshire College
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by BuzzerZen »

Whig's Boson wrote:
BuzzerZen wrote: My point was more that being exposed to a wider vocabulary to begin with improves the odds that one will have a clue of how to pronounce something.
Without the eventual introduction of information on how words are pronounced, this does not follow at all.
I elided the premise that one eventually attempts to say the words one reads, and thus eventually receives information on correct pronunciations.
Evan Silberman
Hampshire College 07F

How are you actually reading one of my posts?

User avatar
BuzzerZen
Auron
Posts: 1517
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: Arlington, VA/Hampshire College
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by BuzzerZen »

powerplant wrote:
cdcarter wrote:
Whig's Boson wrote:As for Silberman's Axiom itself, I will oppose it on the grounds of distributive justice. I can think of no rule better suited to ensure that smaller, newer programs are unable to raise money and get themselves off the ground.
You do realize you have essentially said that newer programs should be allowed to hold really badly run tournaments.
I agree with Bruce though. At Centre, there are three people with "real" quizbowl experience, and one of them doesn't even play. I don't see how my school, which is rather isolated from a pool of highly talented moderators. Under the axiom, Centre would be hosting a tournament with a field capped at around 8 to 12, and unable to field a house team.
In what world are 8-12 team college tournaments too small? This seems to be approximately the field size of most second- and third-tier events in most regions. If you're getting rooms for free, which I believe most college programs are, you're still making $600-800 or more off of an eight team tournament.
Evan Silberman
Hampshire College 07F

How are you actually reading one of my posts?

User avatar
Skepticism and Animal Feed
Auron
Posts: 3195
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Skepticism and Animal Feed »

BuzzerZen wrote:
Whig's Boson wrote:
BuzzerZen wrote: My point was more that being exposed to a wider vocabulary to begin with improves the odds that one will have a clue of how to pronounce something.
Without the eventual introduction of information on how words are pronounced, this does not follow at all.
I elided the premise that one eventually attempts to say the words one reads, and thus eventually receives information on correct pronunciations.
I suppose this is true, but it strikes me as extremely inefficient. It is not necessarily the case that these corrections will be systematically useful.

I have a friend who learned theology at Oxford. I learned theology from reading books and packets. We've been meeting fairly regularly for lunch to discuss the subject, and virtually every time he catches me mispronouncing a technical term (usually a Greek borrowing) and notes how obvious it is that I learned from reading rather than lectures.
Bruce
Harvard '10 / UChicago '07 / Roycemore School '04
ACF Member emeritus
My guide to using Wikipedia as a question source

User avatar
BuzzerZen
Auron
Posts: 1517
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: Arlington, VA/Hampshire College
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by BuzzerZen »

Whig's Boson wrote:I have a friend who learned theology at Oxford. I learned theology from reading books and packets. We've been meeting fairly regularly for lunch to discuss the subject, and virtually every time he catches me mispronouncing a technical term (usually a Greek borrowing) and notes how obvious it is that I learned from reading rather than lectures.
I mean, the main thing is, you knew the words, and you could say them with confidence and without stumbling, even if you said them wrong. In a quiz bowl match, an fluid English-phonetic pronunciation of some word is better than any amount of stumbling.
Evan Silberman
Hampshire College 07F

How are you actually reading one of my posts?

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15320
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by AKKOLADE »

So, like, is it not normal for places to hold morning moderator meetings?
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

manary
Lulu
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 1:19 am
Location: UCSD

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by manary »

At our ACF Winter, we hadn't read the packets yet. I went to bed at 2am, and the email with the packets hadn't arrived yet. I got up and got some things together - unless I wanted to stay up late I couldn't have figured out where the hard words were. If it is a high school NAQT tournament, I usually try to read through and tell people about harder words, but these also usually have pronunciation guides.

Micah
Micah J. Manary
University of California San Diego MSTP '1x
California Institute of Technology '10
Saint Louis University High School '07

User avatar
No Rules Westbrook
Auron
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by No Rules Westbrook »

You just have to face the reality that there are three types of people who moderate: (1) people who are usually not very well-read and trip over all kinds of words (2) people who are well-read and know how to say most common words, but sometimes improperly pronounce more obscure names or things that tend to come up in quizbowl quite often (3) people who are well-read and have been around the game of quizbowl for awhile, so that they know how to pronounce almost every word.

Classes two and three are fine, noone's going to complain about those - even if the moderator mispronounces the name of some author, as long as he or she says it phonetically or offers a reasonable pronunciation, it's easy enough to figure out what they mean. Class one people are unfortunate, but I'm with Bruce - I don't think it's too helpful to go formulating axioms which have the practical effect of stopping some places from putting on otherwise-useful tournaments, since they just don't have enough class two and three people available.
Ryan Westbrook, no affiliation whatsoever.

I am pure energy...and as ancient as the cosmos. Feeble creatures, GO!

Left here since birth...forgotten in the river of time...I've had an eternity to...ponder the meaning of things...and now I have an answer!

User avatar
naturalistic phallacy
Auron
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by naturalistic phallacy »

FredMorlan wrote:So, like, is it not normal for places to hold morning moderator meetings?
Do go over packets? No.
Bernadette Spencer
University of Minnesota, MCTC
Member, ACF
Event Manager, PACE
Order Support and Administrative Assistant, NAQT

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15320
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by AKKOLADE »

tetragrammatology wrote:
FredMorlan wrote:So, like, is it not normal for places to hold morning moderator meetings?
Do go over packets? No.
Well, do you think implementing these would help prevent some of the problems that Evan (really, that everyone) is concerned about with regards to moderators?
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
BuzzerZen
Auron
Posts: 1517
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: Arlington, VA/Hampshire College
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by BuzzerZen »

No Rules Westbrook wrote:I don't think it's too helpful to go formulating axioms which have the practical effect of stopping some places from putting on otherwise-useful tournaments, since they just don't have enough class two and three people available.
Well, the main target of this axiom is programs that do have access to enough competent moderators to put on a tournament of size n, yet find themselves running a tournament of size n+k.
Evan Silberman
Hampshire College 07F

How are you actually reading one of my posts?

User avatar
Not That Kind of Christian!!
Yuna
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Manhattan

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Not That Kind of Christian!! »

FredMorlan wrote:
tetragrammatology wrote:
FredMorlan wrote:So, like, is it not normal for places to hold morning moderator meetings?
Do go over packets? No.
Well, do you think implementing these would help prevent some of the problems that Evan (really, that everyone) is concerned about with regards to moderators?
Brandeis is a very small club, so when we host tournaments, I usually hold pre-tournament moderator meetings with those moderators who are not quizbowl players. This is not to say that it countervents all problems; teams have definitely noticed slow or inexperienced moderators at our tournaments, I know. But at least the moderator meeting enables me to hear the non-quizbowlers read, give them tips, explain the rules in context, etc. As a result, despite the fact that our practices only have between five and ten people at them, we can run satisfactory tournaments and make a little money.
Hannah Kirsch
Brandeis University 2010
NYU School of Medicine 2014

"Wow, those Scandinavians completely thorbjorned my hard-earned political capital."

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5731
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by theMoMA »

FredMorlan wrote:
tetragrammatology wrote:
FredMorlan wrote:So, like, is it not normal for places to hold morning moderator meetings?
Do go over packets? No.
Well, do you think implementing these would help prevent some of the problems that Evan (really, that everyone) is concerned about with regards to moderators?
Most tournament start times run up against building opening times, and god knows that tournaments start late enough as is. There really isn't enough time for extensive moderator meetings at college tournaments. If a new program really wants to run a nice tournament, they could attempt to get together beforehand if the packets arrive early enough.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Captain Sinico »

I don't think that requiring a minimum level of competence hinders new programs in any way. Basically, it seems to me that all we're asking is that people make some effort to practice and train at moderating before they do so in an actual game (one that matters to me,) which is both eminently reasonable and accessible to everyone, however new their program.

MaS
Mike Sorice
Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
ACF
IHSSBCA
PACE

User avatar
naturalistic phallacy
Auron
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by naturalistic phallacy »

Captain Scipio wrote:I don't think that requiring a minimum level of competence hinders new programs in any way. Basically, it seems to me that all we're asking is that people make some effort to practice and train at moderating before they do so in an actual game (one that matters to me,) which is both eminently reasonable and accessible to everyone, however new their program.

MaS
The best training for moderating is reading and observing in practice. I would encourage newer players/people interested in moderating read a couple of packets, get comments if they desire, and watch how more experienced players read and make decisions.
Bernadette Spencer
University of Minnesota, MCTC
Member, ACF
Event Manager, PACE
Order Support and Administrative Assistant, NAQT

User avatar
Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
Chairman of Anti-Music Mafia Committee
Posts: 5640
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) »

Yeah, in preparation for our high school tournaments, I always would spend a couple practices instructing moderators on how to read our high school questions, and I might just read a round to demonstrate, and then I'd always have the moderators who didn't have experience get up and read a game or two so we can make sure they are doing it right. This has paid off pretty well, and would heartily recommend it to any other young and inexperienced program.
Charlie Dees, North Kansas City HS '08
"I won't say more because I know some of you parse everything I say." - Jeremy Gibbs

"At one TJ tournament the neg prize was the Hampshire College ultimate frisbee team (nude) calender featuring one Evan Silberman. In retrospect that could have been a disaster." - Harry White

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6695
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Cheynem »

I'm not a great moderator, so I'm usually pretty sympathetic regarding moderators who struggle over foreign words or scientific terms. Some general things that I think TDs or experienced players could communicate to inexperienced moderators would be, based on personal experiences, this:

*Be enthused. There's nothing that kills a game faster than a moderator who reads in a monotone like he doesn't want to be there. I mean, don't read in a fake game show host way either, but read like you're enjoying what you're doing and the players will too.

*Don't engage in subtle "clues" regarding the questions, ESPECIALLY toss-ups. It's okay in practice or in informal settings, but I think it's bad form for a moderator to comment on a toss-up before reading it, like "This toss-up is bad" or even just "This is exciting" because it communicates certain things to players like "Oh, no, a hose" or "An offbeat answer choice" or it just might confuse players. This is bad. It is even bad, in my opinion, to say "I like the next toss-up" because it might communicate clues based on that reader's personal interests which might not be known equally to all teams.

*Don't be afraid to be a hardass. If you have to neg someone because they stalled when ringing in, do it. Stand by the decision and don't cave. I find it helps to do a consistent, visible way of counting time on toss-ups and on bonuses so you don't consciously or subconsciously change how much time you give people.

*Learn the various subtleties that quiz bowl answers require, like for example that a reasonable "blitz" of information ("H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds" should work for either Wells or War of the Worlds) is acceptable.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
naturalistic phallacy
Auron
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by naturalistic phallacy »

Cheynem wrote:I'm not a great moderator, so I'm usually pretty sympathetic regarding moderators who struggle over foreign words or scientific terms. Some general things that I think TDs or experienced players could communicate to inexperienced moderators would be, based on personal experiences, this:

*Be enthused. There's nothing that kills a game faster than a moderator who reads in a monotone like he doesn't want to be there. I mean, don't read in a fake game show host way either, but read like you're enjoying what you're doing and the players will too.

*Don't engage in subtle "clues" regarding the questions, ESPECIALLY toss-ups. It's okay in practice or in informal settings, but I think it's bad form for a moderator to comment on a toss-up before reading it, like "This toss-up is bad" or even just "This is exciting" because it communicates certain things to players like "Oh, no, a hose" or "An offbeat answer choice" or it just might confuse players. This is bad. It is even bad, in my opinion, to say "I like the next toss-up" because it might communicate clues based on that reader's personal interests which might not be known equally to all teams.

*Don't be afraid to be a hardass. If you have to neg someone because they stalled when ringing in, do it. Stand by the decision and don't cave. I find it helps to do a consistent, visible way of counting time on toss-ups and on bonuses so you don't consciously or subconsciously change how much time you give people.

*Learn the various subtleties that quiz bowl answers require, like for example that a reasonable "blitz" of information ("H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds" should work for either Wells or War of the Worlds) is acceptable.
Excellent summary of things every moderator should aspire to do. And don't be so hard on yourself. You're a good moderator, Mike.
Bernadette Spencer
University of Minnesota, MCTC
Member, ACF
Event Manager, PACE
Order Support and Administrative Assistant, NAQT

User avatar
Maxwell Sniffingwell
Auron
Posts: 2162
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 3:22 pm
Location: Des Moines, IA

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Maxwell Sniffingwell »

BuzzerZen wrote:you're still making $600-800 or more off of an eight team tournament.
You make $100 a team over there?
Greg Peterson

Northwestern University '18
Lawrence University '11
Maine South HS '07

"a decent player" - Mike Cheyne

User avatar
No Rules Westbrook
Auron
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by No Rules Westbrook »

*Don't engage in subtle "clues" regarding the questions, ESPECIALLY toss-ups. It's okay in practice or in informal settings, but I think it's bad form for a moderator to comment on a toss-up before reading it, like "This toss-up is bad" or even just "This is exciting" because it communicates certain things to players like "Oh, no, a hose" or "An offbeat answer choice" or it just might confuse players. This is bad. It is even bad, in my opinion, to say "I like the next toss-up" because it might communicate clues based on that reader's personal interests which might not be known equally to all teams.
Yeah, we could all probably spend hours talking about what kind of moderating we like and what kind we don't, but this is one important point. Even very good players and moderators are prone to doing this kind of stuff (I'll admit that I do it sometimes when I'm not watching myself), and it's annoying. To me, when someone knowledgeable says "this is exciting," it communicates a lot - at the very least, I know it's probably not going to be another tossup on the Wittig Reaction.

I'd personally caution against the being-a-hardass point, but that's a matter of taste probably.
Ryan Westbrook, no affiliation whatsoever.

I am pure energy...and as ancient as the cosmos. Feeble creatures, GO!

Left here since birth...forgotten in the river of time...I've had an eternity to...ponder the meaning of things...and now I have an answer!

User avatar
pray for elves
Auron
Posts: 1048
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:58 pm
Location: 20001

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by pray for elves »

While we're on the topic of moderating well, here's one other tip:
  • If an answer is not on the sheet but you think it could be right, err on the side of counting it wrong the first time; it's far, far easier to, after the tossup ends, figure out that their answer was right and award them credit than it is to explain to the other team why you gave someone credit for what turned out to be a wrong answer.
Evan
Georgetown Law Alum, Brandeis Alum, Oak Ridge High Alum
Ex-PACE, Ex-ACF

User avatar
Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
Chairman of Anti-Music Mafia Committee
Posts: 5640
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: On Moderators, or, Silberman's Axiom Defended

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) »

Yeah, in situations like that what I always do is count the answer wrong, and then remind them if it's something that could feasibly be right but isn't on the page that the team that missed it has the right to protest it to see if it makes a difference at the end. I personally think that's a fair thing to do (especially for high school, when a lot of people are less experienced).
Charlie Dees, North Kansas City HS '08
"I won't say more because I know some of you parse everything I say." - Jeremy Gibbs

"At one TJ tournament the neg prize was the Hampshire College ultimate frisbee team (nude) calender featuring one Evan Silberman. In retrospect that could have been a disaster." - Harry White

Locked