--- In quizbowl_at_y..., tak_seorangpun <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> I don't know who Team A are, but the biggest problem here seems to
be
> that they were unclear on the format from the beginning. If you
> receive a bad packet, it's simpler for both the critic and the
writers
> if you can point out just where the packet violates your
guidelines.
> At least then the writers might pay more attention to your
guidelines.
I meant as in FAQTP tossups and VVBs, which I haven't really seen on
the circuit since I started playing. (I removed the page after I
felt it was no longer useful.) However, said team apparently didn't
know better, so I let it slide. They were very nice about it.
I'd like to add something to what I said about the other two teams.
By no means am I crying over having to edit. I edited my brains out
for this tournament to save a product that at some points was
mediocre at best IMO. When I looked at the other two packets I
described, those caused alarm. I nearly fainted. Twice. That is
not a good feeling.
I understand that I probably shouldn't have commented to one of those
teams, but each of their submissions represent rather scary
directions in which question writing may be going: toward a lack of
question-writing fundamentals, and/or toward a "Canon? What canon?"
mentality.
J-Kel