Errata

Old college threads.
Locked
User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Yuna
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Errata

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

This thread is for errata. There are quite a few additional planned mirrors of this tournament in the coming weeks, so I'd appreciate your posting corrections of any errors you might have caught, so we can fix them for subsequent mirrors. Thanks.

EDIT: Ironically, my post on errata contained a misspelling of the word "mirror"
Last edited by ThisIsMyUsername on Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '19

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton

User avatar
vinteuil
Auron
Posts: 1423
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:31 pm

Re: Errata

Post by vinteuil »

If I recall correctly, the Byrd question began with a generic description of a hexachord fantasy on "Ut re mi fa sol la," which was done by very large numbers of composers ca. 1550-1650. Otherwise, as anyone would expect, the music was very thoughtfully and well-executed.
Jacob Reed (he/him/his)
Chicago ~'25 | Yale '19, '17 | East Chapel Hill '13
"...distant bayings from...the musicological mafia"―Denis Stevens

User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Yuna
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Errata

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

Yeah, you're right about that hexachord fantasia clue; there's no way that's uniquely identifying. I'll try to find a replacement clue.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '19

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Adventure Temple Trail »

Can you please post the "private language" tossup? From what I can tell, every clue from the beginning of the second sentence to the word "Kripke" is not about the private language argument at all, but about the "rule-following problem," which appears elsewhere in Philosophical Investigations and is, from all I can tell and all I was taught about it in course work, just plain unrelated to the private language argument, except by the title of Kripke's essay (which is Wittgenstein On Rules and Private Language). You simply have a tossup where a huge chunk of the clues are about something else entirely, which needs to be fixed. I talked about this with Sam [who wrote the question] today, and I think the best solution is to change this to a question on Wittgenstein or on Philosophical Investigations the book, focusing on the reception of its ideas in later philosophical thought. As is, you just can't have a question whose 5 middle lines are about a different topic than the answer line.
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Try my original crossword puzzles

User avatar
Sam
Rikku
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:35 am

Re: Errata

Post by Sam »

RyuAqua wrote:Can you please post the "private language" tossup? From what I can tell, every clue from the beginning of the second sentence to the word "Kripke" is not about the private language argument at all, but about the "rule-following problem," which appears elsewhere in Philosophical Investigations and is, from all I can tell and all I was taught about it in course work, just plain unrelated to the private language argument, except by the title of Kripke's essay (which is Wittgenstein On Rules and Private Language). You simply have a tossup where a huge chunk of the clues are about something else entirely, which needs to be fixed. I talked about this with Sam [who wrote the question] today, and I think the best solution is to change this to a question on Wittgenstein or on Philosophical Investigations the book, focusing on the reception of its ideas in later philosophical thought. As is, you just can't have a question whose 5 middle lines are about a different topic than the answer line.
3. Anthony Kenny argued against viewing one part of this argument as skepticism about memory in his criticism of Norman Malcolm's analysis of it. Another work compares this argument to Hume's solution to the problem of causation, claiming that it shows how ordinary practices do not require the justification we think, even if we concede the impossibility of truth-conditions. The claim that this is a “skeptical solution to the skeptic's paradox” appears in a book that opens with the example of the (*) “quus function” and argues that it is a corollary of a larger argument about rule-following. That book is by Saul Kripke. The reader is asked to imagine a person who writes “S” every time he feels a sensation in its original formulation in Philosophical Investigations. For 10 points, name this argument by Ludwig Wittgenstein against a system of communication available to only one person.
ANSWER: private language argument
Changing this to just "Wittgenstein" might not be a terrible idea, if it really does lead people astray. However, the Kripke clues are almost all from a chapter called "The Solution and the 'Private Language' Argument" in a book called Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. In fact, Kripke actually argues that private language argument doesn't start at 243 where it's conventionally held but much earlier, when Wittgenstein's talking about rule-following, and brings up the argument repeatedly. For those reasons, I don't think it's fair to say these clues apply to something completely different; Kripke's argument is that they are most definitely not different things. That being said, rule-following should be prompted and I apologize for not considering that earlier. I believe the way John resolved the protest was to include rule-following as a prompt in later sites.
Sam Bailey
Minnesota 'xx
Chicago '13

User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Yuna
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Errata

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

Sam wrote:
RyuAqua wrote:Can you please post the "private language" tossup? From what I can tell, every clue from the beginning of the second sentence to the word "Kripke" is not about the private language argument at all, but about the "rule-following problem," which appears elsewhere in Philosophical Investigations and is, from all I can tell and all I was taught about it in course work, just plain unrelated to the private language argument, except by the title of Kripke's essay (which is Wittgenstein On Rules and Private Language). You simply have a tossup where a huge chunk of the clues are about something else entirely, which needs to be fixed. I talked about this with Sam [who wrote the question] today, and I think the best solution is to change this to a question on Wittgenstein or on Philosophical Investigations the book, focusing on the reception of its ideas in later philosophical thought. As is, you just can't have a question whose 5 middle lines are about a different topic than the answer line.
3. Anthony Kenny argued against viewing one part of this argument as skepticism about memory in his criticism of Norman Malcolm's analysis of it. Another work compares this argument to Hume's solution to the problem of causation, claiming that it shows how ordinary practices do not require the justification we think, even if we concede the impossibility of truth-conditions. The claim that this is a “skeptical solution to the skeptic's paradox” appears in a book that opens with the example of the (*) “quus function” and argues that it is a corollary of a larger argument about rule-following. That book is by Saul Kripke. The reader is asked to imagine a person who writes “S” every time he feels a sensation in its original formulation in Philosophical Investigations. For 10 points, name this argument by Ludwig Wittgenstein against a system of communication available to only one person.
ANSWER: private language argument
Changing this to just "Wittgenstein" might not be a terrible idea, if it really does lead people astray. However, the Kripke clues are almost all from a chapter called "The Solution and the 'Private Language' Argument" in a book called Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. In fact, Kripke actually argues that private language argument doesn't start at 243 where it's conventionally held but much earlier, when Wittgenstein's talking about rule-following, and brings up the argument repeatedly. For those reasons, I don't think it's fair to say these clues apply to something completely different; Kripke's argument is that they are most definitely not different things. That being said, rule-following should be prompted and I apologize for not considering that earlier. I believe the way John resolved the protest was to include rule-following as a prompt in later sites.
Yes, this was how I resolved the protest at the Penn site: that is, even if the rule-folllowing problem is generally considered as something separate from the private language argument in standard interpretations of Wittgenstein, the idea that the latter is a corollary of the former is a central thesis of the "Kripkenstein" argument (and the quus function is a pretty basic example of these concepts being collapsed, since the bizarre twist on addition that it presents could be seen as interpreting the word/concept "plus" according to a private language, in which it bears a different meaning), which is what is being described here. So, your argument that the rule-following paradox is "something else entirely", however valid a philosophical position, doesn't apply when we are explicitly describing the work of another philosopher who expostulates the opposite position. The one clue that could afford rephrasing to be a little bit clearer, perhaps, is the "skeptical solution" clue, since it is a particular component of what Kripke calls Wittgenstein's skeptical solution. I'll see if we can polish that line. But, otherwise, I have added a prompt instruction on "rule-following" for future mirrors, and I apologize that you were not prompted at the time.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '19

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton

User avatar
Chimango Caracara
Wakka
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:29 pm
Location: Hanover, NH
Contact:

Re: Errata

Post by Chimango Caracara »

The splicing bonus part should say "post-transcriptional" rather than "post-translational." Sorry for not catching that.
Nick Jensen
UC Davis Microbiology Graduate Group 2017-?
Dartmouth College 2011-2015

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Adventure Temple Trail »

Hmm, okay. Looking at the wording of the tossup again, and at the full Kripke book, I'm glad to chalk up my neg on the "private language argument" tossup to a hole in my own education, in which I was presented with only the first half of that book, basically. That said, I'm pretty sure from the papers I've read/browsed that the rule-following problem is presented rather frequently in its own right, absent the later connection to private language stuff, so I think that the tossup would still play better with a different answer line, and could use some more words making it clearer that the rule-following stuff is thought to extend or relate to the PLA rather than being the PLA itself.

The "whales" tossup has to accept "giant fish" or similar answers outright or cut the clue about Jasconius, since Jasconius from the Voyage of Saint Brendan is explicitly not a whale except in mistranslations of the original Latin (he's a piscis (fish), not a balaena (whale) or cetus (indeterminate large sea creature)).
Last edited by Adventure Temple Trail on Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Try my original crossword puzzles

User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Errata

Post by Sima Guang Hater »

The Yggdrasil question had a clue about the rooster Fjalar, who lives in Jotunheim, and about the hart Ekthynir (sp?) who lives on top of Valhalla. I realize you excluded Valhalla using that first phrase, but that's still not helpful.
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Brown University, 2009
Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 2018
Medicine Intern, Yale-Waterbury, 2018-9
Dermatology Resident, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2019-
Lord, Fiefdom of Impressionable Children, Unknown-

Member Emeritus, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer, NAQT, NHBB, IQBT

"The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It's one of the never-ending cycles in life."

User avatar
setht
Auron
Posts: 1186
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:41 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio

Re: Errata

Post by setht »

RyuAqua wrote:The "whales" tossup has to accept "giant fish" or similar answers outright or cut the clue about Jasconius, since Jasconius from the Voyage of Saint Brendan is explicitly not a whale except in mistranslations of the original Latin.
Good point.
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:The Yggdrasil question had a clue about the rooster Fjalar, who lives in Jotunheim, and about the hart Ekthynir (sp?) who lives on top of Valhalla. I realize you excluded Valhalla using that first phrase, but that's still not helpful.
Cane Ridge Revival wrote:It’s not part of an underworld, but a body of water located near part of this location is fed by a river flowing from the antlers of a stag. Unlike Gullinkambi, the golden rooster living in this location crows at dawn because light has defeated darkness. Lettfeti and Gulltopp are among those who spend much of each day at this place, which is generally held to be synonymous with Vidofnir’s home (*) Mimameidr. The horses of the Aesir bear their masters here to council. The four deer Dainn, Dvalinn, Duneyrr, and Durathror regularly eat at this location. Some scholars posit that Hoddmimis holt, where Lif and Lifthrasir will hide to survive Ragnarok, is in fact just this entity. Its name means a certain god's "gallows", because to learn the runes, Odin hung himself from here for nine nights. For 10 points, identify this giant ash tree that connects the worlds of Norse myth.
ANSWER: Yggdrasil [accept Mimameidr before mention]
You're right that the stag referred to in the first line is Eikythyrnir, and this isn't my favorite lead-in ever, but I have a hard time seeing a buzz of "Valhalla" off that clue as a reasonable one: Eikthyrnir stands on Valhalla's roof, eats bits of Laerad (or Yggdrasil), and water drips from his antlers down to a different world to form Hvergelmir, the body of water being referenced. And we don't name Eikthyrnir, so you'd have to know that he's the stag whose drippy antlers form a body of water, but ignore all the stuff about that body of water, to get from that clue to Valhalla.

Then in the second sentence the rooster is Vidofnir, not Fjalar (who only crows once, at Ragnarok, as far as I'm aware).

-Seth
Seth Teitler
Formerly UC Berkeley and U. Chicago
President and Chief Editor, NAQT
Emeritus member, ACF

User avatar
Judson Laipply
Rikku
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Bucyrus, Ohio

Re: Errata

Post by Judson Laipply »

Packet 4 Bonus 18 Middle part, the Answerline Jerusalem Delivered should be Torquato Tasso since it is asking for an author.

Packet 11 Bonus 18 was also Packet 4 Bonus 19.

There was also another repeated bonus that I had to skip, but I forget which one it was, hopefully someone else remembers....

I'll also echo the comment in the bio/chem thread that alternate answerlines were way too long for some of the science questions. I think one of them had 9 lines of answers for an 8 line question and that shouldn't ever be necessary.
James L.
Kellenberg '10
UPenn '14
UChicago '20 (probably, who gives a fuck)

User avatar
Excelsior (smack)
Rikku
Posts: 382
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:20 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Errata

Post by Excelsior (smack) »

Can someone post the religion bonus from round 5 that went aarti / something / darshanam? Something seemed bizarre about the wording of the last part of that.
Ashvin Srivatsa
Corporate drone '?? | Yale University '14 | Sycamore High School (OH) '10

User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Yuna
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Errata

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

Excelsior (smack) wrote:Can someone post the religion bonus from round 5 that went aarti / something / darshanam? Something seemed bizarre about the wording of the last part of that.
Identify some components of pujas, the Hindu celebrations honoring the gods. For 10 points each:
[10] Pujas often involve this ceremony in which devotees wave their hand over a lighted lamp or plate containing small lamps.
ANSWER: aarti
[10] Though Aarti lamps may burn camphor, they most often burn this substance, the Indian form of clarified butter.
ANSWER: ghee
[10] This is the Hindu term for a vision or manifestation of the divine. During a puja, a devotee might be expected to experience this after touching the feet of a murti or a guru.
ANSWER: Darsana [or Darshan]
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '19

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton

User avatar
Excelsior (smack)
Rikku
Posts: 382
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:20 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Errata

Post by Excelsior (smack) »

Hm, okay. In my experience, the term "darshan" is used for the actual act of reverence, such as touching the feet of a priest or idol, but I'm willing to chalk this up to me not understanding the spiritual implications of the physical act.
Ashvin Srivatsa
Corporate drone '?? | Yale University '14 | Sycamore High School (OH) '10

User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Errata

Post by Sima Guang Hater »

Excelsior (smack) wrote:Hm, okay. In my experience, the term "darshan" is used for the actual act of reverence, such as touching the feet of a priest or idol, but I'm willing to chalk this up to me not understanding the spiritual implications of the physical act.
I've always heard the physical act as "pranam", for what it's worth (I didn't get this part).
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Brown University, 2009
Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 2018
Medicine Intern, Yale-Waterbury, 2018-9
Dermatology Resident, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2019-
Lord, Fiefdom of Impressionable Children, Unknown-

Member Emeritus, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer, NAQT, NHBB, IQBT

"The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It's one of the never-ending cycles in life."

User avatar
Masked Canadian History Bandit
Rikku
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:43 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Masked Canadian History Bandit »

Round 2 wrote: 5. Sir Robert Holmes’ largely ineffectual raid on a Smyrna convoy was a prelude to one of these campaigns. The Mechelen Incident delayed a different instance of this action by several months, and that campaign was betrayed by Colonel Hans Oster. Prussia signed the Treaty of Basel, taking itself out of the First Coalition, following one of these campaigns in the winter of 1795. The (*) Treaty of Dover set the stage for one of these campaigns, and Alexander Farnese led a protracted instance of this in the early 1580s. Cornelius Tromp was empowered by one of these campaigns, in which the DeWitt brothers were deposed and lynched during the Disaster Year, and the Sack of Antwerp was the result of another; both resulted in eventual victories for the House of Orange. For 10 points, what is this military action undertaken multiple times by Hapsburg forces during the Eighty Years War and by the Nazis in 1940?
ANSWER: Invasions of the Netherlands (accept loose synonyms for both “invasion” and “Netherlands,” including “Low Countries” and “Holland”)
The Peace of Basel clue is ambiguous and could apply to the Prussia in the Kosciuszko Uprising/Third Partition of Poland than in the invasion of the Netherlands during the First Coalition, which was a by French invasion supporting the Batavian uprising. Amending it to "following its defeat in one of these campaigns" would rule out the partitions. Also after looking up the earlier clues, the Mechelen Incident involed plans for an invasion of Belgium and France as well as the Netherlands, and the Holmes raid on the Smyrna convoy was a preclude to a simultaneous Anglo-Dutch and Franco-Dutch war.
Packet 3 wrote:18. WARNING: DESCRIPTION ACCEPTABLE
The “twenty-five thousanders” volunteered to aid this initiative, which resulted in the creation of institutions protected in the Law of Spikelets. The film Earth, successor to its director’s Arsenal, depicts resistance to this initiative, which involved the importation of a number of Fordsons. This program was opposed by a group of people known as “fists,” and it was said to be “overfulfilled” in article that warns against “dangerous and harmful sentiments.” This initiative resulted in the creation of the (*) kolkhozy and solkhozy, and the consequences of this initiative prompted one man to write that his countrymen had become “dizzy with success." As part of this process, peasants slaughtered their own sheep and cattle rather than surrender them, and thousands of kulaks were deported to the gulags. For 10 points, name this process by which the Stalin-led Soviets attempted to consolidate and communalize farming.
ANSWER: collectivization of agriculture in the Soviet Union [accept reasonable equivalents; prompt for country if only “collectivization” is given; accept Russia, U.S.S.R. and other names for the Soviet Union, as well as Ukraine because some of the clues are specifically Ukrainian; prompt on First Five Year Plan]
I know the jury's out there, but I've seen some sources claim that the twenty-five thousanders and the Law of the Spikelets were Soviet attempts to worsen the Holodomor. Will Alston was in the room and generously prompted me (and of course I went off on an incorrect tangent), but the Holodomor should probably be accounted for in the answerline for other readers.
Patrick Liao
Lisgar Collegiate Institute 2011, University of Pennsylvania 2015, University of Toronto Faculty of Law 2019
President, Ontario Quizbowl Association (ONQBA)
Support the ONQBA on Facebook!

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 3064
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Urbana

Re: Errata

Post by Auroni »

Masked Canadian History Bandit wrote: I know the jury's out there, but I've seen some sources claim that the twenty-five thousanders and the Law of the Spikelets were Soviet attempts to worsen the Holodomor. Will Alston was in the room and generously prompted me (and of course I went off on an incorrect tangent), but the Holodomor should probably be accounted for in the answerline for other readers.
I forget what the law of spikelets was, but the twenty-five thousanders were university students and other inexperienced people the Soviets used to try to displace the kulaks at the collective farms. They did make the Holodomor worse, but probably not directly under specific orders to do so (I do agree a prompt should be put in place).
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

"Slaves aren't people lmao." - Ike Jose

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Adventure Temple Trail »

Packet 3 wrote:18. WARNING: DESCRIPTION ACCEPTABLE
The “twenty-five thousanders” volunteered to aid this initiative, which resulted in the creation of institutions protected in the Law of Spikelets. The film Earth, successor to its director’s Arsenal, depicts resistance to this initiative, which involved the importation of a number of Fordsons. This program was opposed by a group of people known as “fists,” and it was said to be “overfulfilled” in article that warns against “dangerous and harmful sentiments.” This initiative resulted in the creation of the (*) kolkhozy and solkhozy, and the consequences of this initiative prompted one man to write that his countrymen had become “dizzy with success." As part of this process, peasants slaughtered their own sheep and cattle rather than surrender them, and thousands of kulaks were deported to the gulags. For 10 points, name this process by which the Stalin-led Soviets attempted to consolidate and communalize farming.
ANSWER: collectivization of agriculture in the Soviet Union [accept reasonable equivalents; prompt for country if only “collectivization” is given; accept Russia, U.S.S.R. and other names for the Soviet Union, as well as Ukraine because some of the clues are specifically Ukrainian; prompt on First Five Year Plan]

I would also appreciate instructions on what to do with answers referring specifically to liquidation, displacement, etc. of the kulaks (I gave the answer "liquidation of the kulaks" right after "dizzy with success" was mentioned, at which point I was likely wrong, but I'd like to know, given that this tournament embraced the anti-prompt elsewhere, whether prompting or anti-prompting or what have you would be possible here.)
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Try my original crossword puzzles

User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Errata

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

RyuAqua wrote:
Packet 3 wrote:18. WARNING: DESCRIPTION ACCEPTABLE
The “twenty-five thousanders” volunteered to aid this initiative, which resulted in the creation of institutions protected in the Law of Spikelets. The film Earth, successor to its director’s Arsenal, depicts resistance to this initiative, which involved the importation of a number of Fordsons. This program was opposed by a group of people known as “fists,” and it was said to be “overfulfilled” in article that warns against “dangerous and harmful sentiments.” This initiative resulted in the creation of the (*) kolkhozy and solkhozy, and the consequences of this initiative prompted one man to write that his countrymen had become “dizzy with success." As part of this process, peasants slaughtered their own sheep and cattle rather than surrender them, and thousands of kulaks were deported to the gulags. For 10 points, name this process by which the Stalin-led Soviets attempted to consolidate and communalize farming.
ANSWER: collectivization of agriculture in the Soviet Union [accept reasonable equivalents; prompt for country if only “collectivization” is given; accept Russia, U.S.S.R. and other names for the Soviet Union, as well as Ukraine because some of the clues are specifically Ukrainian; prompt on First Five Year Plan]

I would also appreciate instructions on what to do with answers referring specifically to liquidation, displacement, etc. of the kulaks (I gave the answer "liquidation of the kulaks" right after "dizzy with success" was mentioned, at which point I was likely wrong, but I'd like to know, given that this tournament embraced the anti-prompt elsewhere, whether prompting or anti-prompting or what have you would be possible here.)
I should have specifically mentioned that as something you could anti-prompt on (it seems reasonable to do so before "kulaks" is mentioned). I guess I figured that a good moderator would have anti-prompted regardless, but since anti-prompting isn't an established Thing yet I guess that didn't work out the way I intended.

Should I add a prompt or anti-prompt for Holodomor? Also, the Spikelets clue is designed to point specifically towards "this program was based around creating some kind of institution", i.e. collective farms.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Re: Errata

Post by Sima Guang Hater »

Well, maybe you can change it to a tossup on "collective farms" and phrase it "this institution" rather than "this effort/event"
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Brown University, 2009
Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 2018
Medicine Intern, Yale-Waterbury, 2018-9
Dermatology Resident, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2019-
Lord, Fiefdom of Impressionable Children, Unknown-

Member Emeritus, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer, NAQT, NHBB, IQBT

"The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It's one of the never-ending cycles in life."

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: Errata

Post by Cody »

gamegeek2 wrote:I guess I figured that a good moderator would have anti-prompted regardless, but since anti-prompting isn't an established Thing yet I guess that didn't work out the way I intended.
This is a very, very bad assumption and always causes a lot of problems (whether we are talking about regular or reverse prompting). While you shouldn't take it to the ridiculous levels that the science did, you should be clear about what you expect moderators to do.
Cody Voight, VCU ‘14. I wrote lots of science and am an electrical engineer.
VCU Tournament Director ‘13-‘17. HSAPQ President ‘15-16. ACF Treasurer ‘19-20.
Hero of Socialist Quizbowl Labor (NSC ‘14). “esteemed colleague” of Snap Wexley, ca. 2016. Stats Hero (Nats ‘16).
Quizbowl at VCU

User avatar
Tees-Exe Line
Tidus
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Tees-Exe Line »

Masked Canadian History Bandit wrote:
Round 2 wrote: 5. Sir Robert Holmes’ largely ineffectual raid on a Smyrna convoy was a prelude to one of these campaigns. The Mechelen Incident delayed a different instance of this action by several months, and that campaign was betrayed by Colonel Hans Oster. Prussia signed the Treaty of Basel, taking itself out of the First Coalition, following one of these campaigns in the winter of 1795. The (*) Treaty of Dover set the stage for one of these campaigns, and Alexander Farnese led a protracted instance of this in the early 1580s. Cornelius Tromp was empowered by one of these campaigns, in which the DeWitt brothers were deposed and lynched during the Disaster Year, and the Sack of Antwerp was the result of another; both resulted in eventual victories for the House of Orange. For 10 points, what is this military action undertaken multiple times by Hapsburg forces during the Eighty Years War and by the Nazis in 1940?
ANSWER: Invasions of the Netherlands (accept loose synonyms for both “invasion” and “Netherlands,” including “Low Countries” and “Holland”)
The Peace of Basel clue is ambiguous and could apply to the Prussia in the Kosciuszko Uprising/Third Partition of Poland than in the invasion of the Netherlands during the First Coalition, which was a by French invasion supporting the Batavian uprising. Amending it to "following its defeat in one of these campaigns" would rule out the partitions.
Wikipedia says that Prussian, Austrian, and Russian representatives assembled to enact the Third Partition of Poland on October 24, 1795, after the Franco-Prussian Treaty of Basel was signed on April 5, 1795. Wikipedia also somewhat confusingly states that Prussia agreed not to further partition Poland at the Treaty of Basel and that they didn't violate the treaty until they joined the Fourth Coalition, which seems inconsistent. I don't know that much about this, specifically not whether the Treaty of Basel has anything to do with the Partitions of Poland except for the general political circumstances, but I don't think Partitions of Poland fits with the way that clue is presented and I think it would be misleading to state that Prussia was defeated in an Invasion of the Netherlands, even if that's true, which I think is also ambiguous: was Prussia involved other than generally being a member of the First Coalition?
Also after looking up the earlier clues, the Mechelen Incident involed plans for an invasion of Belgium and France as well as the Netherlands,
I will add Belgium explicitly to the "equivalents" to the Netherlands that are acceptable, since all of the Eighty Years War stuff doesn't distinguish between the two.
and the Holmes raid on the Smyrna convoy was a preclude to a simultaneous Anglo-Dutch and Franco-Dutch war.
Yes, that's why it's a clue in this question... what is the issue here?

Finally, could people please post substantive critiques of the questions in the question-specific discussion threads? I realize that it adds "gravitas" or whatever to your objections if they appear right off the bat under "Errata," but this thread is really meant for pointing out places where we screwed up packetizing or the answer line is simply wrong given the prompt.
Marshall I. Steinbaum

Oxford University (2002-2005)
University of Chicago (2008-2014)

Get in the elevator.

User avatar
Masked Canadian History Bandit
Rikku
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:43 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Masked Canadian History Bandit »

Tees-Exe Line wrote:
Masked Canadian History Bandit wrote:
Round 2 wrote: 5. Sir Robert Holmes’ largely ineffectual raid on a Smyrna convoy was a prelude to one of these campaigns. The Mechelen Incident delayed a different instance of this action by several months, and that campaign was betrayed by Colonel Hans Oster. Prussia signed the Treaty of Basel, taking itself out of the First Coalition, following one of these campaigns in the winter of 1795. The (*) Treaty of Dover set the stage for one of these campaigns, and Alexander Farnese led a protracted instance of this in the early 1580s. Cornelius Tromp was empowered by one of these campaigns, in which the DeWitt brothers were deposed and lynched during the Disaster Year, and the Sack of Antwerp was the result of another; both resulted in eventual victories for the House of Orange. For 10 points, what is this military action undertaken multiple times by Hapsburg forces during the Eighty Years War and by the Nazis in 1940?
ANSWER: Invasions of the Netherlands (accept loose synonyms for both “invasion” and “Netherlands,” including “Low Countries” and “Holland”)
The Peace of Basel clue is ambiguous and could apply to the Prussia in the Kosciuszko Uprising/Third Partition of Poland than in the invasion of the Netherlands during the First Coalition, which was a by French invasion supporting the Batavian uprising. Amending it to "following its defeat in one of these campaigns" would rule out the partitions.
Wikipedia says that Prussian, Austrian, and Russian representatives assembled to enact the Third Partition of Poland on October 24, 1795, after the Franco-Prussian Treaty of Basel was signed on April 5, 1795. Wikipedia also somewhat confusingly states that Prussia agreed not to further partition Poland at the Treaty of Basel and that they didn't violate the treaty until they joined the Fourth Coalition, which seems inconsistent. I don't know that much about this, specifically not whether the Treaty of Basel has anything to do with the Partitions of Poland except for the general political circumstances, but I don't think Partitions of Poland fits with the way that clue is presented and I think it would be misleading to state that Prussia was defeated in an Invasion of the Netherlands, even if that's true, which I think is also ambiguous: was Prussia involved other than generally being a member of the First Coalition?
Prussian troops in the Netherlands were withdrawn after coalition defeats at the hands of Pichegru over the winter of 1794-95. The whole point of the Treaty of Basel was that the Prussian interests in supporting the coalition were thwarted by the French invasion of the Netherlands, and wanted to focus on the lucrative other war they were fighting in the winter of 1794-95, namely the highly successful suppression of Kosciuszko's revolt!
Tees-Exe Line wrote:
and the Holmes raid on the Smyrna convoy was a preclude to a simultaneous Anglo-Dutch and Franco-Dutch war.
Yes, that's why it's a clue in this question... what is the issue here?
Someone could foreseeably buzz in with "Anglo-Dutch War" or "Franco-Dutch War" and get negged because they're not synonymous with invading the Netherlands (see: Raid on the Medway).
Tees-Exe Line wrote:Finally, could people please post substantive critiques of the questions in the question-specific discussion threads? I realize that it adds "gravitas" or whatever to your objections if they appear right off the bat under "Errata," but this thread is really meant for pointing out places where we screwed up packetizing or the answer line is simply wrong given the prompt.
Those seemed more like subject-specific question-writing philosophy threads, not question-specific discussion threads. Apologies.
Patrick Liao
Lisgar Collegiate Institute 2011, University of Pennsylvania 2015, University of Toronto Faculty of Law 2019
President, Ontario Quizbowl Association (ONQBA)
Support the ONQBA on Facebook!

User avatar
Tees-Exe Line
Tidus
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Tees-Exe Line »

Masked Canadian History Bandit wrote:Prussian troops in the Netherlands were withdrawn after coalition defeats at the hands of Pichegru over the winter of 1794-95. The whole point of the Treaty of Basel was that the Prussian interests in supporting the coalition were thwarted by the French invasion of the Netherlands, and wanted to focus on the lucrative other war they were fighting in the winter of 1794-95, namely the highly successful suppression of Kosciuszko's revolt!
Okay, that's interesting but then it seems like the Third Partition occurred after the Treaty of Basel, so the thing that could have been ambiguous is Kosciusko's uprising, not Partitions of Poland, and hence the plausible buzz is something like "Polish uprisings." I will add the clause "although these campaigns don't involve Poland...." to the beginning of that sentence.
Someone could foreseeably buzz in with "Anglo-Dutch War" or "Franco-Dutch War" and get negged because they're not synonymous with invading the Netherlands (see: Raid on the Medway).
I would hope that "war" lies within the bounds of "loose alternatives" to invasion to any moderator, and I'm loathe to further specify the prompt instructions because whatever alternative to martial activities of one sort or another I forget to name might then be ruled incorrect. As for "Raid on the Medway," the one I'm familiar with happened during the Second, not Third, Anglo-Dutch War and hence I don't see how a buzz with that on the lead-in to this question is anything but a neg.
Marshall I. Steinbaum

Oxford University (2002-2005)
University of Chicago (2008-2014)

Get in the elevator.

User avatar
Masked Canadian History Bandit
Rikku
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:43 pm

Re: Errata

Post by Masked Canadian History Bandit »

Tees-Exe Line wrote:
Masked Canadian History Bandit wrote:Prussian troops in the Netherlands were withdrawn after coalition defeats at the hands of Pichegru over the winter of 1794-95. The whole point of the Treaty of Basel was that the Prussian interests in supporting the coalition were thwarted by the French invasion of the Netherlands, and wanted to focus on the lucrative other war they were fighting in the winter of 1794-95, namely the highly successful suppression of Kosciuszko's revolt!
Okay, that's interesting but then it seems like the Third Partition occurred after the Treaty of Basel, so the thing that could have been ambiguous is Kosciusko's uprising, not Partitions of Poland, and hence the plausible buzz is something like "Polish uprisings." I will add the clause "although these campaigns don't involve Poland...." to the beginning of that sentence.
I guess it depends on when exactly the goals of Prussia went from suppressing Kosciuszko's revolt to partitioning Poland, but this solution work.
Tees-Exe Line wrote:
Someone could foreseeably buzz in with "Anglo-Dutch War" or "Franco-Dutch War" and get negged because they're not synonymous with invading the Netherlands (see: Raid on the Medway).
I would hope that "war" lies within the bounds of "loose alternatives" to invasion to any moderator, and I'm loathe to further specify the prompt instructions because whatever alternative to martial activities of one sort or another I forget to name might then be ruled incorrect. As for "Raid on the Medway," the one I'm familiar with happened during the Second, not Third, Anglo-Dutch War and hence I don't see how a buzz with that on the lead-in to this question is anything but a neg.
Oh, I mean the Raid on the Medway as an example of how an X-Dutch War does not necessarily mean that X is invading the Netherlands, since the Medway Raid notably featured Dutch ships and marines wreaking havoc on the Thames. Hence, some moderators might be hesitant to outright accept answers of "X-Dutch War".
Patrick Liao
Lisgar Collegiate Institute 2011, University of Pennsylvania 2015, University of Toronto Faculty of Law 2019
President, Ontario Quizbowl Association (ONQBA)
Support the ONQBA on Facebook!

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: Errata

Post by Cody »

I don't know why you would expect a moderator to accept "x-Dutch war" or "wars with the Netherlands" for "invading the Netherlands" - they are distinct concepts [and war is not really a synonym at all for invasion], so if "x-Dutch war" or whatever is actually acceptable (or promptable) at some point, you should definitely spell it out. (I of course pass no judgement on whether this is the case). In addition, it is common to use phrases like 'or obvious equivalents for "invasion", such as _war_' to both specify the kind of alternates you are looking for while accepting other..equivalents.
Cody Voight, VCU ‘14. I wrote lots of science and am an electrical engineer.
VCU Tournament Director ‘13-‘17. HSAPQ President ‘15-16. ACF Treasurer ‘19-20.
Hero of Socialist Quizbowl Labor (NSC ‘14). “esteemed colleague” of Snap Wexley, ca. 2016. Stats Hero (Nats ‘16).
Quizbowl at VCU

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6368
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Errata

Post by grapesmoker »

There's a clue in the tossup on the Viceroyalty of Peru that claims that Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa wrote a history of this place. Gamboa's book is called The History of the Incas, so, without knowing the earlier clues, it made a lot of sense for me to buzz in and say "the Incan empire." That's certainly as true as saying that it's about the Viceroyalty of Peru. I would reword that clue to make it less ambiguous.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Errata

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

Here's the question as I wrote it (and as appears in the packets):
The bandeirantes were groups that crossed the eastern border of this polity, in which the Ordinance of Manufacturers was passed in 1664 and the Battle of Jaquijahuana was fought. Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa wrote a history of the peoples living in this polity, where a revolt in opposition to the administration of Blasco Núñez Vela arose. Within this polity, reducciones were divided into 614 curaca-headed repartimientos, of which only one seventh of the male population could be conscripted for labor. Many landowners revolted against the (*) New Laws in this polity, in which Francisco Álvarez de Toledo implemented a series of reforms. This polity, in which the mita system was codified, was dissolved following the Battle of Ayacucho, which secured independence for a country named after this polity. For 10 points, name this polity which, following the conquests of Francisco Pizarro, was governed from Lima.
I do see your concern (his book is called History of the Incas) but I think it's well known that the Inca Empire did not exist any longer in 1664, and the question explicitly states that the polity in question was in existence then.

That being said, would something like "A resident of this polity, Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa wrote a history of the people that controlled its predecessor", with an appropriate rewording of the rest of the question to work with that sentence, be acceptable?
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6368
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Errata

Post by grapesmoker »

gamegeek2 wrote:I do see your concern (his book is called History of the Incas) but I think it's well known that the Inca Empire did not exist any longer in 1664, and the question explicitly states that the polity in question was in existence then.
Sure, that's true, but the clue itself is still misleading, because he really did write a history of the people living in the Inca Empire.
That being said, would something like "A resident of this polity, Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa wrote a history of the people that controlled its predecessor", with an appropriate rewording of the rest of the question to work with that sentence, be acceptable?
I would write "A history of the people who controlled the predecessor to this polity was written by Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa." I would put the name last so there's no confusion about which place we're talking about here.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5751
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Errata

Post by theMoMA »

gamegeek2 wrote:I do see your concern (his book is called History of the Incas) but I think it's well known that the Inca Empire did not exist any longer in 1664, and the question explicitly states that the polity in question was in existence then.
During a quizbowl match, people are unlikely to say to themselves, "Now, I know the book is called History of the Incas, but the question mentioned a date a while back that might invalidate that as a correct answer." If the book is titled History of the X, and you want people to say something other than X, you need to word the clue very carefully.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Errata

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

theMoMA wrote:
gamegeek2 wrote:I do see your concern (his book is called History of the Incas) but I think it's well known that the Inca Empire did not exist any longer in 1664, and the question explicitly states that the polity in question was in existence then.
During a quizbowl match, people are unlikely to say to themselves, "Now, I know the book is called History of the Incas, but the question mentioned a date a while back that might invalidate that as a correct answer." If the book is titled History of the X, and you want people to say something other than X, you need to word the clue very carefully.
I submitted a revision in line with what Jerry suggested, with Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa's name last in the clue. The idea behind the original clue was that the Incas were still a people living in the Viceroyalty of Peru when Pedro was around, and given the earlier clues I didn't think people would get screwed. My mistake.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

User avatar
Gautam
Auron
Posts: 1413
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:28 pm
Location: Zone of Avoidance
Contact:

Re: Errata

Post by Gautam »

Excelsior (smack) wrote:Hm, okay. In my experience, the term "darshan" is used for the actual act of reverence, such as touching the feet of a priest or idol, but I'm willing to chalk this up to me not understanding the spiritual implications of the physical act.
A little late to this discussion, but the clue is fine. Darshan does mean vision. There's a Hindi song which literally asks Krishna to make an appearance because the singer's eyes pine for his sight.

I think you're confusing Darshan with "sharan" or "charan." For instance, when Marathi people do the feet-touching (or more generally "seek protection") they might say "Sharan alo" or "I have come to seek Sharan."
Gautam - ACF
Currently tending to the 'quizbowl hobo' persuasion.

Locked