VETO 2009 SW ONTARIO MIRROR

[Mechanical Beasts]

Or at any rate, that's what make sense to me.

It happens very often that a man has it in him, that a man does something, that he does it very often that he does many things, when he is a young man when he is an old man, when he is an older man. One of such of these kind of them had a little boy and this one, the little son wanted to make a collection of butterflies and beetles and it was all exciting to him and it was all arranged then and then the father said to the son you are certain this is not a cruel thing that you are wanting to be doing, killing things to make collections of them, and the son was very disturbed then and they talked about it together the two of them and more and more they talked about it then and then at last the boy was convinced it was a cruel thing and he said he would not do it and his father said the little boy was a noble boy to give up pleasure when it was a cruel one. The boy went to bed then and then the father when he got up in the early morning saw a wonderfully beautiful moth in the room and he caught him and he killed him and he pinned him and he woke up his son then and showed it to him and he said to him see what a good father I am to have caught and killed this one, the boy was all mixed up inside him and then he said he would go on with his collecting and that was all there was then of discussing and this is a little description of something that happened once and it is very interesting.

You see why we disagree.

[Camelopardalis]

I suppose that what I see of VETO and its players is very different from what is seen by people who play in Ontario, because for most of the regulars in Vancouver, it's the only quiz bowl tournament they play in all year.

Okay, so I think we've found the root of the issue. See, in Ontario, we're actually trying to improve quizbowl; you know, host, mirror or travel to ACF events and similar well-written tournaments, increase the number of teams who actively participate in quizbowl, attempt to improve the level of play in the circuit, introduce quizbowl at the high school level, and all that good stuff.

But based on what you've written, and correct me if I'm wrong, the circuit is essentially dead in B.C., no? So I can see why you don't care about improving the quality of a tournament if collegiate quizbowl doesn't even exist in western Canada. If this is the only tournament that the "regulars" play all year....you've got bigger fish to fry.

That being said, in Ontario, that stuff doesn't fly as easily as perhaps it used to. So I would strongly consider these open offers of editing and the removal of any sort of attempts at funn, because, while I can't speak for other members of the Ontario quizbowl community, I would like to see this become a legitimate, challenging, fair tournament that rivals any other. And without any change, that's just not going to happen, as I hope has been demonstrated to you by others in this thread.

[Mike Bentley]

There's no reason that VETO has to be the only tournament that people in BC play all year. We've hosted 6 tournaments in Seattle in the past year open to all players and would have loved (and have actively tried to encourage) Canadian teams to show up.

[vetovian]

I suppose that what I see of VETO and its players is very different from what is seen by people who play in Ontario, because for most of the regulars in Vancouver, it's the only quiz bowl tournament they play in all year.

Okay, so I think we've found the root of the issue. See, in Ontario, we're actually trying to improve quizbowl; you know, host, mirror or travel to ACF events and similar well-written tournaments, increase the number of teams who actively participate in quizbowl, attempt to improve the level of play in the circuit, introduce quizbowl at the high school level, and all that good stuff.

But based on what you've written, and correct me if I'm wrong, the circuit is essentially dead in B.C., no? So I can see why you don't care about improving the quality of a tournament if collegiate quizbowl doesn't even exist in western Canada. If this is the only tournament that the "regulars" play all year....you've got bigger fish to fry.

Yes, this is the root of the issue. Each year at VETO in Vancouver, there are things that come up that players complain about, but when I ask them if they want to see substantial changes to the way VETO is run, they tell me, oh no, this is just the way VETO is, and we still enjoy it a lot and there's no need for any big changes, and we'll come back next year.

That being said, in Ontario, that stuff doesn't fly as easily as perhaps it used to. So I would strongly consider these open offers of editing and the removal of any sort of attempts at funn, because, while I can't speak for other members of the Ontario quizbowl community, I would like to see this become a legitimate, challenging, fair tournament that rivals any other. And without any change, that's just not going to happen, as I hope has been demonstrated to you by others in this thread.

I should say that this concept of a quiz bowl tournament being "taken seriously" or not, or being "legitimate" or "valid" or not, just isn't one that registers with me, and it never has. So I haven't been arguing about whether VETO deserves the label of "legitimate", but questioning why anyone should be concerned about whether this label should or should not be applied to any particular quiz bowl tournament at all (unless the tournament happens to do something illegitimate on its own terms, like break its own rules). Individuals like playing in some kinds of tournaments more than in others. If participants put work into writing questions for a tournament, and trying to answer questions when they're playing, then of course in some sense they're taking it seriously, but people here are using the term in a sense like college accreditation -- you want to go to a college that's taken seriously because you want to have a degree that will open some doors for you -- rather than putting the emphasis on whether they'll enjoy the activity for its own sake. Presumably some individuals can enjoy participating in a tournament even if (or maybe even because) it has aspects that can be irrefutably proved to make it "illegitimate" or "not to be taken seriously" in the context of good quiz bowl.

That said, I'm obviously getting the message that there are a lot of players in Ontario who don't like some features of VETO. So let's go ahead and be clear what specifically those features are that you want to change. As it says at the beginning of the VETO guidelines (in a section written in 1996): "The goal of our tournament is to have fun." I think we share that goal, but we have different ideas of fun. We'll go with whichever of these ideas are more popular with those who are planning to participate in VETO.

Here are the changes that I see being either proposed or implied here. Include any others, and make these more specific (or tell me if they're not being proposed):

• Packets with themes are not allowed.
• No tactile, olfactory, or gustatory questions.
• No visual or auditory questions, except perhaps on fine arts?
• All or almost all bonuses must have three parts, each worth 10 points, with difficulty levels deemed easy, medium, and hard. Very occasional 5-5-10-10 bonuses allowed, too, but nothing else.
• A different editing system, with volunteers Hannah and Jerry (within the next 3 weeks)?
• Longer tossups?
• Maybe different quotas for number of questions in each subject?

[No Rules Westbrook]

Okay, I think NOW we've discovered the true problem.

Apparently, for you Peter there is no such thing as "valid quizbowl." For me and for a lot of the people on this board, the game of quizbowl has thankfully progressed past the point where it's just a made-up game with made-up rules that we invent on the fly for the kicks and giggles of whoever happens to be in the room (recent nutty post about crazy formats aside!). In my mind, suggesting that there is no such thing as serious qb or valid qb at this point is as ludicrous as suggesting that there is no such thing as a defined game of tennis or Scrabble or whatever. Those things are played according to specific rules which have been developed in order to reward certain skill sets - to create a game that is not made-up and arbitrary like some intramural broomball contest, but rather consistent and fair. The people who play those games seriously believe that qualities like consistency and fairness are what makes the game "fun". There are different types of tennis (grass/clay/hard), just as there are different types of quizbowl, and serious players logically accept all those types as valid as long as they generally reward the skill set the game of tennis is meant to reward. If you invented some game where the net randomly moves up and down while you are serving and the chair umpire can throw rocks at players he doesn't like (on the grounds that you or your cohorts think such a game would be more fun) - serious players would be right in objecting that the game no longer qualifies as "valid" or "serious" tennis.

There are a group of people here who would like to see the state of quizbowl in Canada progress beyond the point where it's essentially just a made-up game invented for someone's brief amusment. To do that, you need a game that is consistent and fair, rewards skill appropriately, etc. As for this year's VETO in particular, I don't know to what extent it could be salvaged by taking the various advice people have been giving in this thread - but I do know that if people of your current mind remain in charge of VETO, it will never change. And if you're happy with it not changing, that's fine, that's your decision.

[fleurdelivre]

If you manage to pull off a three-part bonus with a genuine easy, middle, and hard part that tested something important and academic that involved tasting something, then I will give you one hundred very real American dollars.

Paging Susan... (note: I'm also not sure this can be done, but I'm inclined to believe that it could, if only the once.)

[Sir Thopas]

If you manage to pull off a three-part bonus with a genuine easy, middle, and hard part that tested something important and academic that involved tasting something, then I will give you one hundred very real American dollars.

Paging Susan... (note: I'm also not sure this can be done, but I'm inclined to believe that it could, if only the once.)

"It's coriander, god damnit!"

[Susan]

If you manage to pull off a three-part bonus with a genuine easy, middle, and hard part that tested something important and academic that involved tasting something, then I will give you one hundred very real American dollars.

Paging Susan... (note: I'm also not sure this can be done, but I'm inclined to believe that it could, if only the once.)

I could see maybe doing some sort of drinking in literature bonus (with actual clues about the books to go along with the tasting, naturally), but I think scrounging up a cask of amontillado, a bottle of 1899 Chateau Lafite and a glass of Genuine Stunning Ale for each site would be awfully expensive.

[fleurdelivre]

If you manage to pull off a three-part bonus with a genuine easy, middle, and hard part that tested something important and academic that involved tasting something, then I will give you one hundred very real American dollars.

Paging Susan... (note: I'm also not sure this can be done, but I'm inclined to believe that it could, if only the once.)

I could see maybe doing some sort of drinking in literature bonus (with actual clues about the books to go along with the tasting, naturally), but I think scrounging up a cask of amontillado, a bottle of 1899 Chateau Lafite and a glass of Genuine Stunning Ale for each site would be awfully expensive.

Well, what with Andy footing the bill...

[Not That Kind of Christian!!]

If you manage to pull off a three-part bonus with a genuine easy, middle, and hard part that tested something important and academic that involved tasting something, then I will give you one hundred very real American dollars.

Paging Susan... (note: I'm also not sure this can be done, but I'm inclined to believe that it could, if only the once.)

I could see maybe doing some sort of drinking in literature bonus (with actual clues about the books to go along with the tasting, naturally), but I think scrounging up a cask of amontillado, a bottle of 1899 Chateau Lafite and a glass of Genuine Stunning Ale for each site would be awfully expensive.

Well, what with Andy footing the bill...

A beer milkshake might be cheaper.

[Captain Sinico]

...Um, I think that multimedia can be valuable when you're looking at fine arts. When you're looking at a picture that happens to have something to do with history, or happens to contain terrorists or an island, not so much. It's just gimmickry; it doesn't add educational or competitive value. Hence "weird shit."

I don't agree with this at all. Multimedia questions can be valuable in almost every subject, though the ones in VETO don't tend to reflect that, certainly.

MaS

[Mechanical Beasts]

...Um, I think that multimedia can be valuable when you're looking at fine arts. When you're looking at a picture that happens to have something to do with history, or happens to contain terrorists or an island, not so much. It's just gimmickry; it doesn't add educational or competitive value. Hence "weird shit."

I don't agree with this at all. Multimedia questions can be valuable in almost every subject, though the ones in VETO don't tend to reflect that, certainly.

You're right to disagree; I was simplifying somewhat from what I actually believe since I was only thinking of the context of VETO. Multimedia questions in subjects that aren't the fine arts tend to require more art to construct (the burden on the question writer is heavier when he has to say "Look at this Tanabe-Sugano diagram" than "Look at this painting."), and the VETO ones are regularly poorly constructed (just providing a picture that "happens to have something to do" with the subject of the question). If I were evaluating questions with ties tighter than the sort of coincidentally-related stuff I get out of VETO, my verdict would of course be different.

[MacSR]

It's summer everybody. Chill out. Have some fun.

I'm not one to like gimmicks, and some of these old bonus questions sound pretty crappy (i.e. gobstoppers and chopsticks), but I think a couple people in this thread need to lighten up a bit.

I'm pretty sure the main goal we have in hosting this tournament is to make sure teams come out, it runs smoothly, and teams end up having fun answering trivia questions. I dunno if I'm just speaking for myself, but I like the idea of having a tournament in the summer that reflects the mood of the season for me: relaxed and enjoyable.

[DumbJaques]

I dunno if I'm just speaking for myself, but I like the idea of having a tournament in the summer that reflects the mood of the season for me: relaxed and enjoyable.

Well, my biggest problem with all of this nonsense is that it promotes this kind of mentality. You're essentially defending this tournament by saying that it's good because it's a nice relaxing, enjoyable break, and the logical conclusion from that statement is that you do not find regular competition relaxed and enjoyable. I don't know anyone who plays quizbowl professionally, and when I go to tournaments, I enjoy hanging out with people I rarely get to see, playing on questions, etc. Quizbowl is thus a relaxing and enjoyable activity for me, and I'm pretty sure it is for most people - it's a huge time/money sink for something that makes you miserable.

It really bothers me that there are still places permeated with an attitude that good quizbowl somehow can't be fun because it's too hard or people are too good or you don't get to answer questions on the furry fandom. The places that made the push to do away with horrible quizbowl, to actually establish a good and fair and academic game, they are no longer polluted with this attitude and it's spilled over to the next generation. It's this effort that has been responsible for the decline of NAC and bad formats in general, among numerous other boons for quizbowl. If you really do not enjoy yourself, or if you experience some kind of negative tension when you attend an academic tournament that is well-written, then I'd recommend some introspection as to why that happens, and if quizbowl is really the right thing for you. Because all people have really done here is try to get VETO - which by the way is pretty much a universal object of pity and ridicule - to be a well-written, academic event. There are numerous ways people can disagree about what makes quizbowl good, and I do not agree that you have to emulate some set style to get there. I don't care if you have multimedia bonuses that might not be 100% as fair as all the other questions - big deal, if it really is an academic bonus and not a physical challenger or whatever. You're making it out that by saying what we're saying in this thread, we're somehow robbing you of your fun and trying to force you to join some megalithic monster. We're telling you to cease your nonsensical devotion to a esoterically crafted editing structure that seems designed to create a crappily-written event. Most of the collegiate quizbowlers I've seen (Canadian or otherwise) approve of academic events being well-written and academic. Why in the world does that preclude you from enjoying yourself at a tournament?

[grapesmoker]

It's summer everybody. Chill out. Have some fun.

Hey you people who care about quizbowl, stop caring about quizbowl!

If you haven't figured out by now that shitty questions are not synonymous with "fun," (and are in fact the opposite of fun) I don't know what there is left to say.

[MacSR]

Wow...that is a long response to a short and what I thought was rather light hearted response. You read into my post way too much, ended up putting words in my mouth, and assumed that I don't enjoy NAQT tournaments (in fact, they apparently make me "miserable") or academic tournaments.

And I don't know how you extracted all that from my one post.

... and the logical conclusion from that statement is that you do not find regular competition relaxed and enjoyable.

First of all, I've enjoyed every tournament I've been to, and I enjoy competitiveness and yes, even a little pressure- whether its being a hockey goalie or NAQT Sectional tournaments. Don't make assumptions, no matter how logical you think they are (especially off such a small post).

it's a huge time/money sink for something that makes you miserable.

Quiz bowl does not make me "miserable", I look forward to practices every week, and tournaments even more.

We're telling you to cease your nonsensical devotion to a esoterically crafted editing structure that seems designed to create a crappily-written event.

I don't have some religious "devotion" to VETO...this will be the first year I attend it. So I don' t know where you got that from, I have no "devotion to cease" (For future reference, I'd rather you not tell me to "cease" doing anything, you have no authority there). I just think that it sounded a little whimsical and fun from the description, and I'm excited to help host it. Sure I appreciate the effort to make VETO better, and I agree with some of what you guys are saying (regarding question quality and some of the more gimmicky things), but I don't think the tournament should lose all of its character.

Why would my enjoyment of a non-traditional tournament preclude me from enjoying an academic tournament?

Can't I enjoy both? Or is it one or the other?

So now that we got that out of the way....

It really bothers me that there are still places permeated with an attitude that good quizbowl somehow can't be fun because it's too hard or people are too good or you don't get to answer questions on the furry fandom.

McMaster is not permeated with this "attitude" about "good" quizbowl that somehow seemed to annoy/bother you (I don't know). We have fun at practice , we joke around and chirp each other, we enjoy each other's company. And you know what? We're also competitive in practice. This easygoing attitude may not work for all teams, but it damn well worked for us, our teams won the Canadian sectionals, placed 8th at ICT, and won the Guelph Hybrid Mirror. That's a decently successful season.

Perhaps you misinterpreted my post. You definitely assumed a lot about my character and my school from it, and unfortunately your logic was wrong. You also came off very rude....work on that.

I think that VETO can improve in quality when it comes to questions and gimmicks, I'd rather not see gustatory or olfactory bonus questions.

I don't think that VETO should be turned into a cookie-cutter academic tournament.

For myself I like the idea of an academic tournament with a bit of a whimsical streak during the summer. For me...well..it just fits the relaxed mood of the season.

Well, your opinion on VETO is pretty clear to me (and I'm pretty sure of my assumption, but hey, I could be wrong as you were). But I'd still like to see you all come out to it if you can, and have a good time.

Thanks for the super duper warm welcome to this online quizbowl community!

[Mechanical Beasts]

You also came off very rude....work on that.

You're new to the forums, so it's no biggie, but don't tell other people how to post on the forums. Other posters can have whatever tone they like; if their tone is actually a problem (this is not common!), the friendly moderation staff can and will take care of it. Generally, if someone's acting like a dick, it'll become clear to everyone following along at home (hi mom) and you'll get the moral high ground.

[MacSR]

You also came off very rude....work on that.

You're new to the forums, so it's no biggie, but don't tell other people how to post on the forums. Other posters can have whatever tone they like; if their tone is actually a problem (this is not common!), the friendly moderation staff can and will take care of it. Generally, if someone's acting like a dick, it'll become clear to everyone following along at home (hi mom) and you'll get the moral high ground.

Thank you for the info. I felt the need.....to....defend...my...honour. Yes. That.

[Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)]

So I want to bring up the glaring question. Do people actually have fun letting tons of answers go dead at these tournaments? From all the stats and question sets I've seen of old VETOs, they are actually full of random questions that are inordinately hard, and end up with games where winning teams don't crack 200 combined points and the like. I would think if people want a relaxed tournament, they would want one that is not what's apparently the hardest set of the year.

[DumbJaques]

The same nonsensical stuff we've heard thousands of times before

Do not tell people how to post (especially moderators!), or you will be banned, second post or no. Further, I didn't do any of the things you're accusing me of - but you sure did!

The entire purpose of your post was to justify VETO's failure to meet basic standards of quality with the justification that it was relaxing and enjoyable. f you truly find VETO indistinguishable from well-written academic events in the relaxation/enjoyment department, your post does not make sense. If you really didn't mean this, don't blame me for your logical fallacy. While you're at at, don't act as if the fact that I'm using the imperative when posting on the internet somehow constitutes me hurling down edicts about how you should live your life. I do not really care what you do for fun, where you finished at NAQT (why in the world you would bring that up, I have no idea, but I didn't even know where you were from when I posted), or anything else like that. I'm not making value judgments about McMaster, of which I know nothing, or you, of which I know even less. When you post saying that people should stop suggesting VETO improve, because it's so much fun so it's ok if it's awful and contributes to the stagnation of the Canadian circuit, you join the general McCorquodale chorus of awful quizbowl promotion. That's an attitude I have a problem with, because I know there ARE lots of people in your area and others that desperately wish they were as well-served by good quizbowl opportunities as other places are. If you really do not hold these positions (and I surely accept that you do not), you should think about what you said in your first post, because it really does necessarily imply them.

I never said quizbowl made you miserable - I used the fact that quizbowl requires lots of time and money as evidence for my theory that lots of people find it fun and enjoyable without playing nonsense formats. I wasn't even remotely talking about you! It's almost like you're putting words in my mouth.

I never said anything about your character. I never said anything about your school. Stop whining about people giving you such "super duper warm welcomes" and other nonsense like that (and this really is something I am telling you that you must stop doing, as a moderator). I think defending VETO's unwillingness to adopt some semblance of current standards is damaging to quizbowl in general, Canadian quizbowl in particular, and people who would love to have more well-written academic tournaments in the locations that run VETO even more in particular. And that is what you're doing in your post - that's not an assumption I'm making about it, that's exactly what you're saying.

Please understand - if everyone who attends VETO had the same chances for tournaments that I am fortunate enough to have by virtue of happening to attend college in the Mid-Atlantic area, I wouldn't care at all if you guys ran a tournament with 15/15 hummus distribution every round (and I mean actual hummus). But there are lots of teams for whom VETO constitutes what, 20-40% of their season? All I'm personally saying is that VETO should stop its nonsensical resistance to having bad editing structures, hilariously outdated question guidelines, and physical challenges. And you seem to agree with that, maybe? I'm legitimately wondering, what DO you disagree with me about, now that I've hopefully explained you just invented nonexistant opinions about your team and your character that I have never come close to holding?

[Camelopardalis]

Why would my enjoyment of a non-traditional tournament preclude me from enjoying an academic tournament?

It certainly wouldn’t. By the same token that I, for example, enjoy Jeopardy! and Trivial Pursuit, I also thoroughly enjoy fair and academic quizbowl, and I can further understand why you would find non-traditional events enjoyable. But I believe that the main argument here is the notion that, in order for a quizbowl competition to be inherently fair, and thus “quizbowl”, it needs to adhere to a certain set of standards, which includes the basics that we all accept: pyramidality, non-variable value bonuses, set packet distributions, etc. And I posit that, while a non-traditional event could, potentially, be enjoyable for its own sake, a tournament like VETO should maintain these accepted standards in order to truly be deemed a legitimate, inherently fair quizbowl tournament, especially given the current paucity of quizbowl tournaments in Ontario (disregarding attempts at growth for the upcoming season). And at the moment, VETO does not adhere to all these appropriate standards, due to its inclusion of the “gimmickry” mentioned throughout this thread.

I don't think that VETO should be turned into a cookie-cutter academic tournament. For myself I like the idea of an academic tournament with a bit of a whimsical streak during the summer. For me...well..it just fits the relaxed mood of the season.

Indeed, summer tournaments are a good time for experimentation, and innovation, perhaps through some whimsicality, can be explored at VETO. However, I believe the thought here is that, while providing a good opportunity to try things that wouldn’t normally be tried during “cookie-cutter academic tournament(s)”, such as multimedia bonuses, VETO should still maintain that one important dogma of quizbowl: fairness. And “gustatory”, “olfactory”, and “tactile” bonuses, in addition to the lack of editing in previous years, are among the things that prevent this, and should, if the legitimacy of the tournament is to be maintained, be eliminated.

Also, I think we all agree that tournaments that contain this fairness and legitimacy are certainly a lot of fun. As you and Chris said:

First of all, I've enjoyed every tournament I've been to, and I enjoy competitiveness and yes, even a little pressure- whether its being a hockey goalie or NAQT Sectional tournaments.

...when I go to tournaments, I enjoy hanging out with people I rarely get to see, playing on questions, etc.

And I think we can also all agree that an inherently fair academic tournament can be just as enjoyable as the practices you described:

We have fun at practice , we joke around and chirp each other, we enjoy each other's company. And you know what? We're also competitive in practice.

Having fun at practice doesn’t preclude having fun at fair tournaments. A tournament becomes fun, not through “gimmickry”, especially gimmickry whose resultant effect is unfairness, but rather through the opportunity to “have fun”, “joke around”, enjoy the company of other Ontario quizbowlers, catch up, learn some new things, and “relax”. So I hope, as I’m sure many other Ontario quizbowlers do, that this tournament will abandon such practices, and be legitimately fair while at the same time being a lot of fun, and a great opportunity to relax and catch up during the summer.

And at Guelph, we too “have fun at practice”, “joke around”, and “enjoy each other’s company”. Heck, we practice for more than six hours a week, enjoy learning new stuff, and couldn’t be more excited to go to each and every tournament. And we’re not nearly as successful as McMaster has been this past season (congratulations again, by the way). I think we had a combined winning percentage around .200, and yet we respect the validity of fair quizbowl, and embrace the opportunity that it provides to improve and become more competitive around the circuit. And the main reason for that is that quizbowl is fun: it’s not fun because I get to pick up gobstoppers with chopsticks, it’s fun because I get to interact and compete with like-minded people who enjoy learning new things and bolstering our collective cultural literacy.

And Sameer, don’t mistake what I say as anything less than utmost respect for McMaster’s program: you guys have done a lot to introduce good quizbowl in Ontario, through things like ACF events and a general attitude in favour of traveling and hosting more tournaments, and we look forward to working closely with McMaster in the future to further these sort of things. In addition to that, you’ve trounced Guelph on multiple occasions; but I encourage you not to confuse fun with “gimmickry”, and instead embrace a format that encourages fairness. And more importantly, let’s hope VETO can become a tournament that simultaneously embraces fairness, competition, relaxation, fun, and innovation.

[MacSR]

I think we're saying the same thing Chris. And thanks for the well run Hybrid mirror!

[Captain Sinico]

You also came off very rude....work on that.

For reference, this isn't telling someone how to post.

MaS

[grapesmoker]

I think everyone should really read Chris Greenwood's latest post maybe three or four times, because he articulates perfectly the problems with VETO and why people make a big deal out of it. I'll just reiterate the offer I made in the other thread: I'll edit any packet that is sent to me on or before the last weekend of June; please note that this is a hard cutoff, which is my way of saying "I really mean it and I'm not going to look at anything that gets in later." If you care about VETO being quality, send me packets.

[Not That Kind of Christian!!]

I'll also reiterate that I'm happy to help Jerry with fine arts, lit, and biology.

[grapesmoker]

I'll also reiterate that I'm happy to help Jerry with fine arts, lit, and biology.

whoo yeah teamwork

[cvdwightw]

Gimmicks should not prevent people from having fun at VETO. The problem is that people not attending the Vancouver site seem to want something that approximates "real quizbowl" and the people attending the Vancouver site seem to want something that approximates "gimmicky not-quizbowl."

It seems to me that regardless of how this tournament ends up, at least one side is going to be terribly disappointed in how VETO turned out. Unless instead of reading well-written tossups on reasonable answers, the Vancouver site turns everything into a physical challenge (Tossup 1: both teams play charades on Soseki's I Am a Cat; Bonus 1: You have here a page with four well-structured bonuses. Fold it into a paper airplane and launch it. You will get one point for each foot it travels.).

[Sir Thopas]

Tossup 1: both teams play charades on Soseki's I Am a Cat

Hannah, Shantanu, you've read this book, haven't you? I have two ideas so far. Get on Skype sometime.

[Not That Kind of Christian!!]

Gimmicks should not prevent people from having fun at VETO. The problem is that people not attending the Vancouver site seem to want something that approximates "real quizbowl" and the people attending the Vancouver site seem to want something that approximates "gimmicky not-quizbowl."

I'm not looking to expunge gimmicks, if that's what people attending want and what the format dictates and all. But what academic material there is might as well be good and solid and pyramidal so that fun might more easily be had whether or not you like gimmickbowl.

Tossup 1: both teams play charades on Soseki's I Am a Cat

Hannah, Shantanu, you've read this book, haven't you? I have two ideas so far. Get on Skype sometime.

I am going to install Skype just for this.

[Mike Bentley]

Gimmicks should not prevent people from having fun at VETO. The problem is that people not attending the Vancouver site seem to want something that approximates "real quizbowl" and the people attending the Vancouver site seem to want something that approximates "gimmicky not-quizbowl."

There are plenty of people attending the Vancouver site who want something that approximates "real quizbowl".

[Mechanical Beasts]

Since everyone else is in a volunteering mood, I'll volunteer to edit chem for this; I can also handle myth fairly well (and anything else Jerry tells me to edit I'm willing).