> Is it time to spell out the answers to the above questions and presume > that all posters agree with them unless they are prepared to explain, > in a sensible manner, why they don't? What else can be done to make > constructive criticism an effective tool for improving people's > organizational skills rather than a sign to start calling each other > names? > > --M.W. I do not think that time has come. First and foremost, the method you suggest assumes that all interested parties keep up with the Yahoo group, and will be willing to get into a protracted debate with those who already have strong opinions on the questions you pose. I believe that there are many in the quizbowl community who would shy away from arguing their position on any or all of the questions you pose because they believe "explain, in a sensible manner" means open myself up for ridicule by the hardcore elements of quizbowl. While this perception may only be in the mind of the beholder, it does present a serious problem if the goal here is to create a dialogue whereby objective standards for quizbowl tournaments that are supposed to be agreeable to the entire community. As for your second question about constructive criticism, I personally believe that in any group like this someone will always take intended constructive criticism as a personal slight. There's just not much that can be done about that regardless of objective standards approved by the community. I would propose, first, that intended constructive criticism that focuses on a single individual or program begin over private E-mail. That is, if tournament X had a particularly bad problem with repeats, rather than single out the editor in public, E-mail privately first. This would help accomplish the goal of de-incentivising name-calling, because, hopefully the responding individual will not feel as defensive as when he or she is called out in public. On the other hand, general criticism not directed at any individual or club should still be directed to the Yahoo board as a first resort. For example: "I think there are too many Victoria Woodhull questions in quizbowl tournaments." Finally, everyone on the board should keep in mind basic standards of civility when posting, especially with, or in response to, criticism. I think in most cases tournament criticism in useful, and instructive to those planning future tournaments. Personal attacks, have, in my experience, never proved instructive. Last, I think an Antonin Scalia like quest for objective rules of quizbowl tournaments is only bound to stifle experimentation, and I think a certain amount of variety is part of the fun of competing in quizbowl. Anyone who would like to take me up on keeping criticism leveled at an individual can E-mail me at stkaplan2005 (at) student.law.ucla.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:47 AM EST EST