Page 1 of 1
Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 2:12 am
by Important Bird Area
This is your specific-question discussion for the 2016 DII SCT.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:39 pm
by Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock
The tossup on Judges in round 9 has a major error. The Book of Joshua precedes it, but the tossup says it follows it. That produced a neg in our room.
Also, I don't know if this is something that's considered acceptable by the quizbowl community at large and just struck me as weird, but there were a few repeats of answerlines among the sets. The ones that I remember offhand are a bonus with spores as an answerline followed in a later packet by a tossup on spores, and an ionization tossup with a bonus later with the answerline ionization energy.
Overall we had fun with this set, but these are some things I noticed that I can think of off the top of my head. I'll take another flip through the packets and see if there's anything else worth noting.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:00 pm
by sonstige
Maybe the reader misspoke, but the question does say "precedes."
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:03 pm
by Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock
sonstige wrote:Maybe the reader misspoke, but the question does say "precedes."
The copy of the set that I have says "follows," in italics as well. Maybe that was something marked for editing that wasn't fixed in time for our site?
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:06 pm
by sonstige
You're right --- I see it as that way in the hard-copy as well.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:10 pm
by touchpack
Barry Marshall, not Barry Mitchell, is the name of the scientist who demonstrated that H. pylori causes gastric ulcers.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 5:57 pm
by Chaac and Ayyy
The "male gaze" question in round 7 was incredibly transparent. I feel that answerline is more appropriate for a bonus than a tossup since there are few other "gazes" that could possibly be alternative answers. A petrifying gaze is the only other I can think of off the top of my head.
The "Iranian women" question from round 4 was very unclear as well. Our opponent buzzed and answered "Muslims", then "Iranians" once prompted and negged. We answered "women" initially then "Muslim women" once prompted but were initially told that the words "Iranian women" were underlined and bolded together, thus both were needed. However, our opponent Carnegie Mellon B was gracious enough to give us the question on the grounds that "Iran" was said in the final clue of the tossup. I'm not sure what the procedure is regarding that but I definitely feel that the question should have been less specific if the country was already included in the clues.
Other than those two question issues the packets were very well done and entertaining. We had a great time and are looking forward to next years edition!
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:10 pm
by Important Bird Area
DII SCT round 5 wrote:answer: _Iranian_ _women_ or _women in Iran_ (accept similar answers that mention the notions of living in _Iran_ and being _female_; accept _women_ or _girl_s or _female_s after "Iran"; prompt on partial answers)
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:43 pm
by Cody
Except the answerline did not have Iranian underlined in DI -- **very** different answerlines for the same questions between sets (see also: Wicked Witch of the West) is a big problem.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:57 pm
by Important Bird Area
That is indeed a real and big problem. I'll discuss this with the rest of our editors (with the warning that there might not be an easy solution, since both sets are undergoing final editing at the same time).
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 7:23 pm
by theMoMA
There are two ways an answer line might differ between DI and DII. First, when a question is converted from DI to DII, it often goes to a subject editor in DII, who may have a different conception of the question, and may change the answer line. Second, questions occasionally get converted before a DI set editor makes a change to the answer line, in which case the question will go to the subject editor without the answer line that ends up being the final one in DI.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:05 pm
by vinteuil
Cody wrote:Wicked Witch of the West
I don't know the full details of the discrepancy, but isn't Elphaba
not the Wicked Witch yet when she sings that? (Or: at least as she begins to sing it.)
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:07 pm
by Valefor
theMoMA wrote:There are two ways an answer line might differ between DI and DII. First, when a question is converted from DI to DII, it often goes to a subject editor in DII, who may have a different conception of the question, and may change the answer line. Second, questions occasionally get converted before a DI set editor makes a change to the answer line, in which case the question will go to the subject editor without the answer line that ends up being the final one in DI.
Speaking as the D2 subject editor for this question, I am 99% sure what happened with this is that Andrew was accidentally not cc'd on an email conversation I had regarding this question/answer line with another editor--when I thought that he was. If anyone else got tripped up by this, I sincerely apologize.
vinteuil wrote:Cody wrote:Wicked Witch of the West
I don't know the full details of the discrepancy, but isn't Elphaba
not the Wicked Witch yet when she sings that? (Or: at least as she begins to sing it.)
I wrote the D1 Wicked Witch question, which then got converted. I'm not sure off the top of my head what the D2 answer line was, but the D1 answer line had "accept"s for both Elphaba and Evillene prior to the namedrop(s). (The song in question, "No Good Deed," is sung in Act 2 when Elphaba basically accepts the mantle of "Wicked Witch," while she had been widely referred to as that by others since the end of Act 1.)
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:17 pm
by Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock
Vissi d'arte wrote:theMoMA wrote:There are two ways an answer line might differ between DI and DII. First, when a question is converted from DI to DII, it often goes to a subject editor in DII, who may have a different conception of the question, and may change the answer line. Second, questions occasionally get converted before a DI set editor makes a change to the answer line, in which case the question will go to the subject editor without the answer line that ends up being the final one in DI.
Speaking as the D2 subject editor for this question, I am 99% sure what happened with this is that Andrew was accidentally not cc'd on an email conversation I had regarding this question/answer line with another editor--when I thought that he was. If anyone else got tripped up by this, I sincerely apologize.
vinteuil wrote:Cody wrote:Wicked Witch of the West
I don't know the full details of the discrepancy, but isn't Elphaba
not the Wicked Witch yet when she sings that? (Or: at least as she begins to sing it.)
I wrote the D1 Wicked Witch question, which then got converted. I'm not sure off the top of my head what the D2 answer line was, but the D1 answer line had "accept"s for both Elphaba and Evillene prior to the namedrop(s).
The DII answer like said "do not accept or prompt on Elphaba." We had a game decided based on that, as our opponent buzzed with Elphaba and got negged.
Personally I think that, even with different editors, the answerline should be held constant, but if that's just how it is then ok.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:10 pm
by vinteuil
gettysburg11 wrote:Vissi d'arte wrote:theMoMA wrote:There are two ways an answer line might differ between DI and DII. First, when a question is converted from DI to DII, it often goes to a subject editor in DII, who may have a different conception of the question, and may change the answer line. Second, questions occasionally get converted before a DI set editor makes a change to the answer line, in which case the question will go to the subject editor without the answer line that ends up being the final one in DI.
Speaking as the D2 subject editor for this question, I am 99% sure what happened with this is that Andrew was accidentally not cc'd on an email conversation I had regarding this question/answer line with another editor--when I thought that he was. If anyone else got tripped up by this, I sincerely apologize.
vinteuil wrote:Cody wrote:Wicked Witch of the West
I don't know the full details of the discrepancy, but isn't Elphaba
not the Wicked Witch yet when she sings that? (Or: at least as she begins to sing it.)
I wrote the D1 Wicked Witch question, which then got converted. I'm not sure off the top of my head what the D2 answer line was, but the D1 answer line had "accept"s for both Elphaba and Evillene prior to the namedrop(s).
The DII answer like said "do not accept or prompt on Elphaba." We had a game decided based on that, as our opponent buzzed with Elphaba and got negged.
Personally I think that, even with different editors, the answerline should be held constant, but if that's just how it is then ok.
Apologies, I meant when she sings "Defying Gravity," which is where we buzzed (and got accepted for saying Elphaba).
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:36 pm
by theMoMA
To be clear, the answer of "Elphaba" was accepted in DI; it was my decision to keep that in as the DI editor. It was also my decision as the subject editor and DI editor to have "women" as the required portion of the answer for the tossup whose clues talked about women in Iran. I don't know why the DII subject/set editors decided to be more demanding, but I likely wouldn't have changed these answer lines in DI, even had I known that the DII editors felt differently.
Re: Question-specific discussion: 2016 Division II SCT
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:18 pm
by Kilroy Was Here
I had one small issue with a bonus. I believe it was in round two or three, but one part had an answer of "Byzantine Empire," and the question referred to it as the successor state of the Eastern Roman Empire, which isn't true. They were one and the same, and although I didn't see anyone get confused by it, it could confuse someone and cause them to say Ottoman Empire.