Charlie Steinhice wrote: > All I can say is, if you didn't like the finished product, you > shoulda seen 'em *before* Samer worked on 'em. On that note I think there's a strong case that "Worst Editor" should be a many-way tie between various TD's/schools over the years that didn't actually bother to edit. (Non-editing is fine for a guerrilla event, not so fine when packs are submitted in advance.) The general problem with the "worst" categories in this poll (or any poll like it) is that the winner, instead of being the true "worst X," would be the "worst *famous* X." For example, I'm sure there's more than one memorably bad reader out there that anyone other than a select group of people just doesn't know about, assuming that somebody mercifully steered the bad reader towards other pursuits. It's really not relevant to anyone just how bad that reader had been. Analogously, "worst writer" is probably one of those people who contributed 1/4 of a pack to a C team's submission. They sent 6/6 to their team captain, of which barely 2/2 were remotely usable, but the team captain included all 6/6 anyway out of apathy or lack of time. Matt (Of people whose question writing is actually relevant, I take strange pride in being a multi-nominee for both Best and Worst. To some extent both camps are correct. That said, to my taste, I find some of the "Worst Writer" nominees to be significantly better writers than some of the "Best Writer" nominees. I'll single out Tom Watters as someone whose work is deeply underrated.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST