Somebody Should Do Something About All The Problems

[merv1618]

There's recently been a lot of discussion regarding how to expand "good" quizbowl tournaments to either inactive or never-active areas. What's happened above is a good example of how progress is being hindered. Yes, the format of the announced tournament is quite sub-par, though the quick bad-mouthing from board mods/experienced players is not only unprofessional, it only serves to alienate those unfamiliar with the modern circuit.

However, since I never quite had the clout as a player to win the right to speak incredibly freely on these boards, I'm sure most high-up mods will just slap a ban on me as a hope of silencing, especially as many of said mods were behind the original slandering. It's my hope that they don't, but at this point I don't care and don't plan on logging on to these forums for a long while. My point is that immediately throwing vitriol on what is seen by many practitioners of "good quizbowl" as bad, stupid, improper, what have you, does nothing to promoted desired ideals of more tenured and experienced players; it only puts them to shame.

I'm glad Rob added a less harsh rephrasing of his original post, and the suggestions to mirror DEES (without any condescension) instead of the HS-level set are exactly what should happen. However, the whole concept of micromodding needs to be revised. Telling annoying high school players to stop living life as the troll under the bridge is one thing, but shaming someone for defending against scathing unwarranted responses is quite different, regardless of who "knows better."

User was banned for 24 hours for this post. User was previously warned to stop backseat modding the board, then told again, then specifically told he would be banned if this continued, then given a grace post the next time he did it anyway. Patience for this intentional martyr complex has worn thin.--the mgmt

[The Time Keeper]

However, since I never quite had the clout as a player to win the right to speak incredibly freely on these boards, I'm sure most high-up mods will just slap a ban on me as a hope of silencing, especially as many of said mods were behind the original slandering. It's my hope that they don't, but at this point I don't care and don't plan on logging on to these forums for a long while. My point is that immediately throwing vitriol on what is seen by many practitioners of "good quizbowl" as bad, stupid, improper, what have you, does nothing to promoted desired ideals of more tenured and experienced players; it only puts them to shame.

No one needs clout as a player to speak freely on these boards. I am all the proof a person should need of that. I don't believe anyone plans to ban you for posting this, and your passive aggression doesn't contribute to anything in a positive way.

Edit: Apparently a ban happened, and the reason for it was you bringing it up in the first place. You set things in motion and got the results you desired, please don't think unkindly of us for being part of the process.

[Cheynem]

If you'll pardon my language, Adam, I'm fucking annoyed by your post.

After the original post, I posted a semi-credulous question, trying to see if I was reading it correctly? After being assured that I was, I posted three, polite, succinct points explaining why I disagreed with this tournament's question source. I said "I'm glad to see Purdue is active and hope a more appropriate tournament/question set can be found."

If this is "slandering" or "bad-mouthing," I'm stunned. I resent being attacked in this manner. Like the vast majority of people in this thread, I was attempting to help the Purdue team--this involved a polite but firm correction of something that is indisputably a bad idea. I didn't attack the poster or the team because I don't even know who they are.

I have no idea how any of this hinders progress in the growth of quizbowl. Nobody here told the Purdue team to go away or that they're stupid. This implication that I as a moderator throw out insults and "shame" people and then silence debate is inaccurate, offensive, and bothersome to me.

[Auks Ran Ova]

I've split the thread because most of this post has nothing to do with the Purdue tournament and everything to do with Adam Sperber's weird persecution complex.

My point is that immediately throwing vitriol on what is seen by many practitioners of "good quizbowl" as bad, stupid, improper, what have you, does nothing to promoted desired ideals of more tenured and experienced players; it only puts them to shame.

Like, what does this intricate garden path of a sentence mean? "Don't be not nice?" A pleasant sentiment, surely, but bluntness and directness can be very useful colors in the rainbow that is good-quizbowl advocacy. I said what I said because I saw Mike had already posted and knew others would as well, and was fully prepared to soften my approach as the discussion went on. Perhaps I was a bit snippy, but I felt that "your idea is no longer considered acceptable in current practice" was an important point to make clearly and immediately. Further, your characterization of the thread is just plain wrong--no one "shamed" Stan for defending himself, no responses were "unwarranted"; the fact that you decide the idea that someone "knows better" than someone else belongs in scare quotes kind of says it all.

Regardless, as Mike has adroitly pointed out, this isn't a well-intentioned critique of anything, it's you still being mad that moderators have told you to stop making shitty posts, and deciding to accuse us of "slander" and "micromodding" as a result. Don't do that.

[Adventure Temple Trail]

In case it affects anything, Stan Jastrzebski's name is first mentioned on these boards in 2006, and NAQT's database claims he was a player for DePauw as far back as 1999, so we aren't really giving him a "welcome" in any real sense (though this may well be a welcome back for him). It's more than fair to give someone who's been around for that long a clear firm statement on what today's quizbowl community does and doesn't find acceptable (and I doubt anyone who started quizbowl after about 2008 or so would know, prior to today, what a "CUT-style" tournament even consisted of or be prepared to propose one).

[Skepticism and Animal Feed]

Rude, arrogant moderators have been a problem on HSQB for years. It's easy to assume that just because the substance of your post is right, that delivery doesn't matter. But it does matter, and bad delivery caused this poor OP to have a needless freak out and probably a setback to his quizbowl career.

[Cheynem]

I have no idea what displays of rudeness and arrogance were going on in that other thread.

[The Time Keeper]

The framing of things as rude and arrogant is problematic.

[jonpin]

So this is a college tournament on high school questions that is timed?

Hey DePauw guy, it's not 2002 any more, no self-respecting college team wants to play a timed tournament on high school questions. Thanks.

To expand on Rob's point:
1. It is not good to mirror a high school tournament because many college students may have written for it (or I guess played it, depending on what set you're using).
2. Timed format is shaky enough at SCT and ICT and probably not a good idea for a new program/tournament that may have staffing issues.
3. There are plenty of good college tournaments that can be mirrored. Using a HS tournament and a timed format are not good solutions.
I'm glad to see Purdue is active and hope a more appropriate tournament/question set can be found.

Just in case teams in the Midwest (who haven't played the set at Northwestern on 11/22) are itching to play quizbowl in early December, WKU is hosting a DEES mirror on December 7. Unlike the tournament announced in this thread, our tournament will use actual college questions and won't be on the clock.

These were the four posts between the original tournament announcement and the response of:

Nice to see some old traditions (like bad-mouthing people you've never met on internet message boards) haven't died in the time I was away from the circuit.
How about this: instead of just complaining, offer a real solution. Do you have a tourney you think we should mirror instead? Tell us what it is (or, better still, offer it up). This is much more constructive than flaming me, the team (and its players, who you ALSO haven't met, but are a much more courteous group than I've encountered at most programs) and NAQT.

So... this is bullshit. The four replies are (1) questioning the tournament [Mike noted he was confirming if he was reading the announcement correctly]; (2) criticizing the tournament; (3) giving reasons why this was a bad idea and ideas for improvement; (4) counter-advertising.
First of all, with the possible exception of "Hey DePauw guy, it's not 2002 any more", there's not the SLIGHTEST thing that could reasonably be called "bad-mouthing" Stan or the Purdue program. Mike even says 'Hey, glad to hear that Purdue has a team again.' Criticizing a thing is not the same as criticizing a person, and neither is calling someone a terrible person.
Second, it's suggested that "instead of just complaining, offer a real solution. Do you have a tourney you think we should mirror instead?" Again, Mike said "There are plenty of good college tournaments that can be mirrored. Using a HS tournament and a timed format are not good solutions." He's telling Stan to try looking around for ideas on college tournaments (and also implicitly suggesting, hey maybe run this IS as a high-school tournament, since it's a high school set).

However, since I never quite had the clout as a player to win the right to speak incredibly freely on these boards

Being an all-star player has never been the inside track to being a mod. Yes, Matt Weiner is on the board staff, but so am I. What IS required to get "the right to speak incredibly freely" is the recognition that this board is for discussing good quiz bowl.

[jonpin]

Just to tack on something I forgot in the last one, even if you view all four posts as personal attacks, there is nothing there that could be considered flaming "the team" or "NAQT". Calling IS sets high school questions is not flaming NAQT--NAQT knows these are high school questions!