Difference between revisions of "Talk:Arminius scandal"
Kevin Wang (talk | contribs) |
Kevin Wang (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
I can move the information over, but there won't be much: the thread stops rather abruptly and I'm not familiar with what the state of the NAQT rulebook was at the 2006 ICT. I think ideally someone could edit in a little more context to go alongside this. -[[User:Kevin Wang|Kevin Wang]] ([[User talk:Kevin Wang|talk]]) | I can move the information over, but there won't be much: the thread stops rather abruptly and I'm not familiar with what the state of the NAQT rulebook was at the 2006 ICT. I think ideally someone could edit in a little more context to go alongside this. -[[User:Kevin Wang|Kevin Wang]] ([[User talk:Kevin Wang|talk]]) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Wait, I've found some more of the context (for anyone interested: [https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2611]) and will try to get that in as well. | ||
Latest revision as of 11:55, 25 December 2020
Is this really a "scandal," or is it just Matt Weiner venting his frustration about his denied protest? Should this page even exist at all?
- Eric Yin
Can probably be folded into the page on the 2006 ICT. There were several events at that tournament that led to players on contending teams being less than thrilled with it, but "NAQT has fixed many of these issues in the intervening 14 years" is an equally important part of the story. Matt Weiner (talk) 05:45, 25 December 2020 (CST)
I can move the information over, but there won't be much: the thread stops rather abruptly and I'm not familiar with what the state of the NAQT rulebook was at the 2006 ICT. I think ideally someone could edit in a little more context to go alongside this. -Kevin Wang (talk)
Wait, I've found some more of the context (for anyone interested: [1]) and will try to get that in as well.