Hey Brian, thanks for your reply. As far as I'm concerned, it's (a) a small issue and (b) in the past (and I don't even remember the Ceuta issue, it might have been another team). But I appreciate your being concerned enough to respond--I was really more concerned with the "no vowels" as a general pronouncement than with any ruling in particular (I don't recall it affecting my team), and I didn't have any problems with your moderating in general. In response to other comments, I also found the "lie" conceit to be distracting--I suppose it could work in principle, but for the most part it was just hard to tell which clues were lies without adding any enjoyment to the game. If the "lie" structure is used again, it might be better for the lies to be added in-house after packets were received, since there might be a more coherent vision of the intent. Another thing (the last one I'll bring up) that's a matter of principle rather than one of playability is the linked tossup-bonus format--while I don't think it affected my play, I really prefer the "luck of the draw" of non-linked questions. Linked questions in principle avoid the nailing-the-tossup, zeroing-the-bonus phenomenon (I'm not sure this is really the case, but I'll give the system the benefit of the doubt), but my thought is that they may not be as strong a test of general knowledge as randomized questions. Also, they could pose a problem if a bonus or bonus part is thrown out. Does anyone else have thoughts on the advantages or disadvantages thereof? Lindsay
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST