Difference between revisions of "Mukherjee-Passner Effect"
fix>QBWikiBot |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The '''Mukherjee-Passner Effect''' occurs when a player is accused of having bad personal qualities out of frustration by those who lose to that player, despite not actually demonstrating said qualities. The canonical example is | + | <onlyinclude>The '''[[Eric Mukherjee|Mukherjee]]-[[Dan Passner|Passner]] Effect''' occurs when a player is accused of having bad personal qualities out of frustration by those who lose to that player, despite not actually demonstrating said qualities. The canonical example is Eric Mukherjee being labeled "arrogant" by the circa 2008 [[Yale]] team, for the crime of beating Yale at quizbowl. |
| + | |||
| + | This is not currently in use.</onlyinclude> | ||
(The word "arrogant" appears to be a new catch-all term for "person I do not like," even if they are not in fact "arrogant" or it makes no sense to call them "arrogant" in context.) | (The word "arrogant" appears to be a new catch-all term for "person I do not like," even if they are not in fact "arrogant" or it makes no sense to call them "arrogant" in context.) | ||
| Line 7: | Line 9: | ||
[[Category:Quizbowl lingo]] | [[Category:Quizbowl lingo]] | ||
[[Category:Original QBWiki Page]] | [[Category:Original QBWiki Page]] | ||
| + | {{c|Eponymous laws}} | ||
Latest revision as of 16:18, 15 June 2021
The Mukherjee-Passner Effect occurs when a player is accused of having bad personal qualities out of frustration by those who lose to that player, despite not actually demonstrating said qualities. The canonical example is Eric Mukherjee being labeled "arrogant" by the circa 2008 Yale team, for the crime of beating Yale at quizbowl.
This is not currently in use.
(The word "arrogant" appears to be a new catch-all term for "person I do not like," even if they are not in fact "arrogant" or it makes no sense to call them "arrogant" in context.)
This effect demonstrates Flaxman's Paradox, in which those who profess to not care about quizbowl are the ones who have their intellectual self-worth wrapped up in quizbowl performance and must slander those who beat them, but serious players who spend more time on quizbowl do not fall victim to overvaluing the metaphysical importance of game results.