"Although there are a lot of misconceptions in this message..." at least you're upfront enough to say that about your own post at the start... sorry, found that funny/ 1)I'm not sure where you get the impression I am tightassed. That very post you refer to was an exasperated attempt, said out of humor, at ending a thread that was going straight to nowhere. I could cite other examples: (#8675309, for example.) 2)I realize that you do not do quizbowl professionally. The people associated with NAQT have other jobs as well. What I was talking about was "acting professional," as in "acting with grace or class given one's position." I assumed that, when I talked about your position as a representative of ACF and how your comments reflected badly on all of ACF, you would grasp that not terribly subtle point. I'm sorry for being so obvious. 3)While calling ACF the "people's format" has a charm much akin to something in a Robert Mugabe speech, obviously, someone has to run it. You do "speak on behalf of it" with your announcements and are its *head editor*. No one is under the impression that MAQT Charlatan speaks ex cathedra on matters of ACF, but given that you are the *head editor,* (let me run that by again: the *head editor*) I don't think I reaching too far in assuming that, if the *head editor* takes a swipe at another format, someone might think it would reflect badly on ACF as a whole. If R. Hentzel took a swipe at ACF, would people think, "Gee, the head editor of NAQT is making NAQT look bad by being so petty toward ACF"? Probably so. Again, I apologize for being so obvious. 4)You personally are not one fourth of the (not "my") quizbowl universe. ACF is. It is, after all, one of the four major formats. Again, I apologize for being so obvious. 5)The very fact you would take these swipes at NAQT suggests that *you* think you're in competition, since, God forbid, ACF, the One True Format, has such great questions about Lula Mae Barnes, and no cat stories in its closet. I never said they were competing, but it's fairly easy to deduce it: with budgets so small and only so many tournaments a team can go to, some teams have to choose one over the other. So, duh, they are in some form of competition. I apologize once more for the terribly obvious nature of my comments. 6)I have to confess, I am not here for "old skool mondo flaming" (if I were, I would have made a joke about you, the QB universe, your waistline, and the inflationary model). If somehow "old skool mondo flaming" is what is required to convey a couple of rather simple points across, then perhaps I should revert to it. 7)Referencing Sturgeon's law was clever the first 17,000,000 times it showed up on Usenet. 8)I really do not insist on hearing about skeletons from NAQT's past. My whole point in originally posting was to point out how silly interformat wars can be (hence, the "I enjoy both formats" comment by me.) Both formats are good, if you ask me. But one format loses its edge when it cares too much about slagging the other formats. As I said earlier, there is more to a good format than questions with pyramidal structures. I seriously expect this will be my last comment on this; I think I have made my point clear and people will either agree with me or think I'm an asshole. Which is par for the course.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:44 AM EST EST