I wouldn't say my experience was compromised by the shortness of the set, but it was certainly lessened. It was also lessened by the presence of several repeats--I'd have thought that with less packets there would be less repeats, but it felt like we got a typical full tournament's worth in the 10 packets we heard. It was also lessened by a healthy dose of weak questions. I guess I'll wait until it's confirmed that the mirrors have all wrapped up before I get into this.Matt Weiner wrote:One team from the midwest who said they were writing a packet did not, and I had to combine two packets submitted since one of them was atrocious. Myself and Andrew Alexander wrote four full packets for this packet-submission event, which I figured would be more than enough; I'm not sure what to do when only 6 reasonable submitted rounds, a basically useless seventh round, and half of an eighth round from someone who wasn't required to write anything and was doing me a favor to even give me that much, is what shows up. We didn't really have time to write a fifth or sixth editor packet this week since we had no way to know in advance that it would be necessary. I hope no one's experience was compromised by the shortness of the set.
I'm going to stop grousing here and move on to grousing in another thread.
What did other people think of the tournament?