Looking for practice material?

Find thousands of free archived packets for practice and study from the Quizbowl Packet Archive!

2009 MSHSAA contract

Discussion of quizbowl topics not related to specific tournaments
QUESTIONSGALOL
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by QUESTIONSGALOL »

hey guys
check out these awesome questions ur gonna get to play at mshsaa tournaments this year
Questions asking you to spell read, lolololo!!!! see, questions galore got dat fire cuz were so K00l underbidding people who actually care about making good questions. (lol like anyone cares about quizbowl being any good!) so LIKE totally were so awesome post here about how good our study guides on cookinng and newberry book awards (KIDS LIT IS THE BEST PART OF QUIZBOWL LIT)
hey i gotta go get ready to win this 3rd grade quiz on what verbs are and insult the intelligence of anyone going to our tournaments cuz im so cool we dont have to listen to anyone
talk about me, YO!

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

Well, who am I to refuse such a request from such an awesome company?
Basically, Questions Galore getting the bid is like Missouri going a thousand miles backwards in quality and entrenching ourselves in our provincial ways that will perpetuate our inability to actually play good quizbowl. Anyone who supports this should be nothing short of ashamed of themselves for stifling the growth of healthy competition on quality questions, most especially the awful writers who produce Questions Galore, sets that notably ignore literature, language arts, math, and geography distributions along with any modicum of quality writing standards.

AShoaib
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by AShoaib »

Oh dear. I'd really not like to lose games because our reflexes are slower than the other team's, even if we know more than them.










:(

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

Prepare for it.

QUESTIONSGALOL
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by QUESTIONSGALOL »

hey what why am i supposed to be ashamed? i think tossups about respelling narcolepsy as eric clapton is TITE yall.
these questions rock cuz

User avatar
redliberte
Posts: 426
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by redliberte »

lol. but yeah, QG sucks hardcore. this is truly a long step backwards for quizbowl in MO.

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4472
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by DeckardCain »

Now confirmed on the MSHSAA webpage.

Seriously, how did this happen? Questions Galore is hideous, and I thought that the AdCo didn't even like them.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6653
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

Questions Galore is THE source for Scholastic Bowl competition questions.  Questions Galore has been a proven source of quality questions for more than ten years and we are the supplier of choice for state tournaments in Illinois, Arkansas, Alabama, and now Missouri.
It's on the Internets so it must be true...

But yes, how in the world did this happen?

I guess we'll all have to stop preparing for academic tournaments and brush up on our sewing knowledge. After all, they have an entire study guide on it.

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4472
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by DeckardCain »

I'm hoping that QG was just the only company to bid, or it was between them and someone even more hideous, like Chip Beall. Otherwise, this is tremendously insulting.

Those of you in college should expect an email from me later this afternoon.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

HSAPQ submitted a bid.

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4472
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by DeckardCain »

ashkenaziCD wrote: HSAPQ submitted a bid.
This is interesting.

Byko
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Byko »

I have a bit of a concern about MSHSAA.

I got a phone message from them about a month ago asking why I hadn't responded to the package they had sent me regarding submitting a bid for writing for MSHSAA for this upcoming season.

Multiple times, I tried to call them back, but no one answered. Not only that, there was no voice mail or answering machine either. I tried to call them back to tell them:

1. I never received any sort of package from them.
2. I wasn't going to be submitting a bid because I've gotten out of the question writing business, almost certainly for good.

So, this is very unfortunate, but I have to wonder if the MSHSAA folks have a bit of a lack of organization on their hands in addition to all the other problems.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6653
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

Maybe MSHSAA thinks that since HSAPQ is made up of college-age students, they too are unable to find certain anatomical parts with both hands and a map and thus are incapable of writing questions.

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4472
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by DeckardCain »

Byko wrote: I have a bit of a concern about MSHSAA.

I got a phone message from them about a month ago asking why I hadn't responded to the package they had sent me regarding submitting a bid for writing for MSHSAA for this upcoming season.

Multiple times, I tried to call them back, but no one answered. Not only that, there was no voice mail or answering machine either. I tried to call them back to tell them:

1. I never received any sort of package from them.
2. I wasn't going to be submitting a bid because I've gotten out of the question writing business, almost certainly for good.

So, this is very unfortunate, but I have to wonder if the MSHSAA folks have a bit of a lack of organization on their hands in addition to all the other problems.
I had the exact same problem (although I did receive an email about the MSHSAA contract). I did not place a bid either, because our club simply did not have the resources to come up with 21 rounds.

ELADAMO89
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:00 am
Location: fordland,MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by ELADAMO89 »

this CAN'T be true
i've only played on qestion galore once
but it was still the worst questions i have ever played on
sorry to mention the obvious
but this terrible
so much for placing at state this year

wldcat_blldog
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Eureka, MO...or Kirksville, MO....or any points in between while driving
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by wldcat_blldog »

Can someone give me an example of a Questions Galore packet? I want to know what I may be up against if a revolution is in order.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

The narcolepsy tossup that QUESTIONSGALOL bragged about above was a real event during a Lexington tournament that used Questions Galore, if that should give you any idea.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FZW Coach »

ashkenaziCD wrote: HSAPQ submitted a bid.
This is incorrect. There were no other bids that came our way.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FZW Coach »

The President of Questions Galore will be attending the MACA Conference and asking for input on improving their questions. I am anticipating this to be a very fruitful exercise.

As far as losing questions because you are too slow, it happens. Um . . . sin 30 . . . everyone knows that, but someone will buzz in faster than others.

There are a million other examples I can think of, but will not at this time.

As far as taking a step backwards, we are hoping that they will take some hints to make their questions what we would like them to be.

We also have discussed ways to possibly improve question submissions by having an editor for classes 1 and 2, and a seperate editor for classes 3 and 4 with the idea that both editors would have no affiliation with their respective classes.

Questions Galore is looking for helpful suggestions (according to what he told me on the phone), so an all out bash fest as most often happens on this message board is unfruitful and gives this message board a bad name in the light of official circles. Look at their questions and offer helpful suggestions.

By the way, Eureka and others, we are using them for Two Saints and GACs as well. I also suggested both Washington and Warrenton tournaments use them (although I don't make that decision).

I will say, though. If you are going to complain about losing because you are slow, then you need to change your mindset. A Bible Quiz team I coached in 2001 lost the National Championship because the other team buzzed in early, but was smart enough to deduce (or guess as far as we were concerned) what the question must be. It happens to the best of us.

FishyFreshman
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FishyFreshman »

I have been reading some of their questions and they are pretty terrible. They are nearly all buzzer races, which is obviously bad quiz bowl. They also have just ridiculous things, like the Clapton question. I think this bashfest may not be productive, but it's probably understandable.

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4472
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by DeckardCain »

Coach Gibbs, thanks for clarifying the issue for us. I do have a couple of points:
FZW Coach wrote:
ashkenaziCD wrote: HSAPQ submitted a bid.
This is incorrect. There were no other bids that came our way.
This is certainly unfortunate. The major problem is that not many quality writers write for the Missouri format, but there's not much that can be done about that currently, so I won't dwell on that.
The President of Questions Galore will be attending the MACA Conference and asking for input on improving their questions. I am anticipating this to be a very fruitful exercise.
...
As far as taking a step backwards, we are hoping that they will take some hints to make their questions what we would like them to be.
...
Questions Galore is looking for helpful suggestions (according to what he told me on the phone), so an all out bash fest as most often happens on this message board is unfruitful and gives this message board a bad name in the light of official circles. Look at their questions and offer helpful suggestions.
I hope some positive suggestions are generated, and that the writer takes them to heart. Out of curiosity, do you have to be a MACA member to attend the conference?

Also, while a productive discussion is always better than a bashfest, people do take this very seriously and don't want to see state championships decided on poor questions, which, sadly, all of the Question Galore packets I've ever seen have been (I played in several tournaments in HS that used them, none of which were any good). Hopefully they've improved somewhat, but it doesn't really sound like they have.
As far as losing questions because you are too slow, it happens. Um . . . sin 30 . . . everyone knows that, but someone will buzz in faster than others.
...
I will say, though. If you are going to complain about losing because you are slow, then you need to change your mindset. A Bible Quiz team I coached in 2001 lost the National Championship because the other team buzzed in early, but was smart enough to deduce (or guess as far as we were concerned) what the question must be. It happens to the best of us.
The point of all this discussion, Coach Gibbs, is that questions should be written so that this isn't an issue! You cannot look me in the eye and say that you wouldn't feel cheated if FZW lost the state championship by 1/100 of a second because the final question of the match tested nothing but reflexes. Questions should be written with clues in pyramidal order so that the team that knows more can buzz in first. Question Galore's product does not do this, which is why most of us do not find it acceptable.
We also have discussed ways to possibly improve question submissions by having an editor for classes 1 and 2, and a seperate editor for classes 3 and 4 with the idea that both editors would have no affiliation with their respective classes.
I saved this part for last, because it's the most important. If I am given full power to edit the questions to any extent I deem necessary, I will do this for no charge. I'm completely serious about this; I will edit the entire district/state set for free. I have no connections to any program in the state, as Viburnum no longer participates in districts, as far as I am aware. Let me know about this as soon as you can.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

Hey coach Gibbs - saying that nobody besides Questions Galore bid is a lie. I know for a fact Matt Weiner contacted MSHSAA and submitted a bid through the channels he was instructed to.

Matt Weiner
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Matt Weiner »

I don't know what happened to my bid. No one ever confirmed it got there or told me it was denied. I assume it was lost in the mail or something (or is sitting unopened under a stack of badminton eligibility forms somewhere in the MSHSAA office, given the chaos about paperwork there that is well-documented even on this board). But that's fine--had I known two months ago what I know now about the way Missouri quizbowl treats its students, I wouldn't have wanted to get involved with them anyway.

I'm willing to accept that Questions Galore is the only bid they saw. If I had been in that position, I would have rejected them, since they are incompetent writers, and extended the bidding window to find someone else. I can't imagine that the bylaws require the Board to accept the only bid regardless of quality or price, if there is just one bid. What if they had bid $2000 per round, would you have taken that, or found another way? Also, what if they sent you absolutely terrible, non-pyramidal, non-academic questions, that don't even follow your own distribution let alone any sensible one, as their required sample round? Oh wait, that's what QG did! So what's the point of the sample round, anyway, if you're just going to approve bad questions?

Awehrman
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Awehrman »

I don't have time to weigh in more fully, but I think that Matt and Charlie have done a pretty good job in making their arguments here and on the high school board.

Calling it a step backwards doesn't come close to describing what an awful move this is. Questions Galore was without a doubt the worst question provider when I was in high school in the late 90s. This is sending the state championship back decades, and I'm not sure sure there ever was a time when questions like these were considered top quality. Even when short questions were in style nationally, Questions Galore could not even stand up to Chip Beall, ASCN, or any number of one or two line question writers.

Would it be possible for someone to come up with a list of question providers for each year of MSHSAA's state and district championship? I think Questions Galore has won the contract in the past, right? I'm thinking they may have provided the questions my senior year in 1999, but I can't remember.

FordATeam/CC
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FordATeam/CC »

FZW Coach wrote:
As far as losing questions because you are too slow, it happens. Um . . . sin 30 . . . everyone knows that, but someone will buzz in faster than others.
Don't even get me started on the "quality" (or lack there of) of math questions that are seen in many companies.

FordATeam/CC
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FordATeam/CC »

I have to agree with the majority of the sentiment that has been written. Unfortunately, I don't believe I will be able to attend the MACA convention due to a mandatory summit conference PDC meeting which happens to be on the same date. Otherwise, I would have had A LOT to say about not only THIS, but also the debacle of restructuring that adds a primarily meaningless sectional round to competition.

On a side note, I got to inform our fellow conference schools about this new addition (of a sectional round) and the first thing that was brought up is the lack of attendance that already occurs in many districts and the fact that many coaches did NOT want to procede with this change (especially if it was pretty much meaningless).

richbob
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by richbob »

I would like to provide a couple corrections to some recent emails.

I wrote the 1999 questions - His company (Questions Galore) and my company (The Question Bank) have similar names.

I wrote the state questions for four years - 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002.

After I moved to Richland in 2002 (July), I no longer bid on the state questions.

I did receive an email from Stacy with bidding information. I politely told her that it would not be ethical for me to get the contract because I teach and coach at Richland.

Questions Galore has undergone an ownership change. The present author-owner purchased the business a couple of years ago. So he should not be blamed for questions from a few years ago. He told me last Saturday that he would follow the guidelines provided to him by MSHSAA. I encouraged him to write pyramidal questions. He seemed to want to do a good job. He is asking for input, so email him with suggestions. Try to use some tact when you do this.

Writing 23 state games is a HUGE undertaking. Until you have written, typed, and proofed that many questions, you will never understand just how much work it is. Then you have people wanting conference games, JV games, Jr. High games, and special orders (half-games). I am sure that Shawn will confirm this fact.

Good luck to all of you this year.

Bob Brown
The Question Bank
Richland High School

User avatar
scphilli
Posts: 2097
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:00 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by scphilli »

richbob wrote: He is asking for input, so email him with suggestions. Try to use some tact when you do this.
Buzzkill.










:)

Awehrman
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Awehrman »

Bob, thanks for clarifying my confusion regarding the question providers. I knew that the questions for MSHSAA changed between my junior and senior years, but it's been a long time.

I hope that you're right about the new owner's willingness to improve his question set and that he is open to some polite suggestions and advice.

STPickrell
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by STPickrell »

Bob, can you provide the new QG owner with my contact information? If he is interested in writing short pyramidal questions akin to what I wrote for districts, I will be happy to provide him with advice and review questions (I will be free after January to edit). It seems my efforts were at least tolerated by both the pyramidal and anti-pyramidal parties and the biggest problem with my questions was the delay in delivery (darn day job and toddler who inherited her mommy's sleep habits!)

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FZW Coach »

ashkenaziCD wrote: Hey coach Gibbs - saying that nobody besides Questions Galore bid is a lie. I know for a fact Matt Weiner contacted MSHSAA and submitted a bid through the channels he was instructed to.
Um . . . . Charles . . . . what in the world?



I just have to say it again . . . . what in the world?

How can I be called a liar on two message boards with absolutly no validity behind the statements. What are you people doing? Honestly . . . . is the internet really this bad? I was introduced to the World Wide Web in 1994 as a selected high school senior. I didn't know that 14 years later people would be allowed to freely slander someone with no just cause.


Let me try this one more time. There were no other bids brought to our (the committee) attention. If Matt submitted a bid, I no nothing about it. Of course, I do not work at MSHSAA. If you want to create a conspiracy theory, feel free.

I did say clearly at the meeting that I felt like we were taking a step back. However, we have a bid process that is clearly stated on the MSHSAA site. We felt like we had to honor that in order to remain credible to question writers around the state.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FZW Coach »

Matt Weiner wrote: I don't know what happened to my bid. No one ever confirmed it got there or told me it was denied. I assume it was lost in the mail or something (or is sitting unopened under a stack of badminton eligibility forms somewhere in the MSHSAA office, given the chaos about paperwork there that is well-documented even on this board). But that's fine--had I known two months ago what I know now about the way Missouri quizbowl treats its students, I wouldn't have wanted to get involved with them anyway.

I'm willing to accept that Questions Galore is the only bid they saw. If I had been in that position, I would have rejected them, since they are incompetent writers, and extended the bidding window to find someone else. I can't imagine that the bylaws require the Board to accept the only bid regardless of quality or price, if there is just one bid. What if they had bid $2000 per round, would you have taken that, or found another way? Also, what if they sent you absolutely terrible, non-pyramidal, non-academic questions, that don't even follow your own distribution let alone any sensible one, as their required sample round? Oh wait, that's what QG did! So what's the point of the sample round, anyway, if you're just going to approve bad questions?
I was under the assumption that you wanted nothing to do with Missouri after your long letter proclaiming the stupidity of everything Missouri. I think you said something about how Missouri wants to hold people back all success (something extreme like that).

We would have loved to read a second bid. As it was, we only read the one bid and talked about the plusses and minuses of each and every question. We made notes that were submitted to Questions Galore.

QUESTIONSGALOL
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by QUESTIONSGALOL »

lol HEY GUYS CHECK IT
im like all into saying things that totally like are cool cuz!
cool stuff that like misleads d00dz or is totally factually wrong. i think thats totally awesome! i dont got no ethical dilemma goin on up here in dis hizzy. ive been using the internets since i was like 10 and im all about l13k t3h haxorz!too bad there are all these mean scary internet people to mess wit my game cuz! oh well i guess i gotta just keep on postin whats not true so the world thinks i got it crunk and if those internet bullies come after me on the playground and hit me with reality ill just scream for Mrs Herskowits to make em go away since i dont like dealing in reality, YEAH!
hey GO MEMORIZE ALL YOUR 10th DERIVATIVES SO YOU CAN MAYBE DO MY MATH PROBLEMS IN UNDER 45 SECONDS CUZ IMMA STUMP THE STARS lol rite!

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4472
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by DeckardCain »

FZW Coach wrote: Let me try this one more time. There were no other bids brought to our (the committee) attention. If Matt submitted a bid, I no nothing about it. Of course, I do not work at MSHSAA. If you want to create a conspiracy theory, feel free.

I did say clearly at the meeting that I felt like we were taking a step back. However, we have a bid process that is clearly stated on the MSHSAA site. We felt like we had to honor that in order to remain credible to question writers around the state.
Yeah, guys, let's take a step back here. I, like Matt, have no problem believing that the AdCo never received Matt's bid, knowing how disorganized MSHSAA is (two years ago they lost my form stating I would work at state, not once, but twice).

Also, just a warning to everyone to keep it civil. This isn't directed to anyone in particular.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FZW Coach »

QUESTIONSGALOL wrote: lol HEY GUYS CHECK IT
im like all into saying things that totally like are cool cuz!
cool stuff that like misleads d00dz or is totally factually wrong. i think thats totally awesome! i dont got no ethical dilemma goin on up here in dis hizzy. ive been using the internets since i was like 10 and im all about l13k t3h haxorz!too bad there are all these mean scary internet people to mess wit my game cuz! oh well i guess i gotta just keep on postin whats not true so the world thinks i got it crunk and if those internet bullies come after me on the playground and hit me with reality ill just scream for Mrs Herskowits to make em go away since i dont like dealing in reality, YEAH!
hey GO MEMORIZE ALL YOUR 10th DERIVATIVES SO YOU CAN MAYBE DO MY MATH PROBLEMS IN UNDER 45 SECONDS CUZ IMMA STUMP THE STARS lol rite!
Why is a fake account like this allowed to post?

FishyFreshman
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FishyFreshman »

It is representative I suppose.

FishyFreshman
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FishyFreshman »

Wait, you think it's fake?

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

I was under the assumption that you wanted nothing to do with Missouri after your long letter proclaiming the stupidity of everything Missouri. I think you said something about how Missouri wants to hold people back all success (something extreme like that).

We would have loved to read a second bid. As it was, we only read the one bid and talked about the plusses and minuses of each and every question. We made notes that were submitted to Questions Galore.
I challenge you to find Matt saying anything so base in that letter as "Missouri is stupid." No, I have seen it and would open up the floor to anyone else who has seen it who can actually find anything rude or objectionable in tone about that letter. Also man, find me Missouri policies actively promoting success. I certainly can't find any. And what on earth are you attacking Matt for, bidding? I can't think of a more absurd logic than "hey you've criticized the way we do things and volunteered to help change things, so I'm going to yell at you for trying to help." Note that when Matt sent out that email he had already been working on bidding (and whether you believe it or not, he did submit a bid that was somehow lost by MSHSAA).
As for being offended that people are questioning your honesty, well, what do you expect when you engage in dishonest behaviors like actively asking for people involved in academic competition to tell you what it is we want advocated for at MSHSAA meetings, and then going right around and immediately responding to said suggestions with basically "well I'm not going to advocate that because only like you and 2 other people in the world care enough about quizbowl to actually give a crap if I advocate for good rules." I find representing yourself as someone willing to do one thing and then after people believe you and respond to it, going around and doing the exact opposite is nothing but dishonest.

Charbroil
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charbroil »

I challenge you to find Matt saying anything so base in that letter as "Missouri is stupid."
With all due respect, this does seem like a reasonable summary of Matt's opinion of Quiz Bowl as it exists in Missouri--at least, Missouri Quiz Bowl's policies. I don't think Coach Gibbs means that Matt believes that all things Missouri are stupid--that would, as you note, go a bit far. Whether Missouri policies are entirely stupid is of course subject to debate--notwithstanding the strong opinions towards the affirmative, I think it can still be politely debated--but even you say something along the lines of what Coach Gibbs says Matt says just two lines after accusing Coach Gibbs of falsely accusing Matt of calling Missouri (presumably, Missouri policies) stupid. Something along the lines of, perhaps:
"Also man, find me Missouri policies actively promoting success. I certainly can't find any."
Face it, statements like this imply Missouri policies are stupid. And that's what Coach Gibbs is saying Matt is implying. As far as I can tell, nothing more.
Why is a fake account like this allowed to post?
Yeah...in retrospect, there is a rule against this sort of thing. I think we can safely say that "QUESTIONSGALOL" has failed to identify himself...and while the satire might have been mildly amusing as an initial announcement of the news and as an expression of collective annoyance, I do think it's getting a little old.

Speaking of which, I'm not really an authority figure, so I can't make this statement with authority behind it, but aren't we getting a little too excitable around here? As Coach Brown has already mentioned, the ownership of Questions Galore has changed, and the new owner has stated his willingness to work with us. Let's take a look at his questions before crucifying him, his company, and everything he supposedly stands for.

Speaking of which, Coach Gibbs, doesn't a question provider give MSHSAA and maybe MACA a sample of what sort of questions he writes before he gets approved for the bid? If so, would it be possible to have the sample provided to MSHSAA posted to this board in another thread for critiquing? If so, the owner of Questions Galore could read our comments and hopefully make necessary adjustments before they are used.

And Charles Dees, do try and remember that regardless of what happens, you aren't personally affected by these questions anymore. Coach Gibbs and I, on the other hand, have to deal with them in 8-11 of our competitions this year (Two Saints, Washington, Warrenton, GACs, Districts, and maybe State). We have to live with these questions more than anyone else on this board. I may have to bulk up on my sewing, carpentry, and cooking knowledge soon.

Well, everyone has always told me that I need to have a more practical focus towards life...










:D

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charlie Dees »

Charbroil wrote:
I challenge you to find Matt saying anything so base in that letter as "Missouri is stupid."
With all due respect, this does seem like a reasonable summary of Matt's opinion of Quiz Bowl as it exists in Missouri--at least, Missouri Quiz Bowl's policies. I don't think Coach Gibbs means that Matt believes that all things Missouri are stupid--that would, as you note, go a bit far. Whether Missouri policies are entirely stupid is of course subject to debate--notwithstanding the strong opinions towards the affirmative, I think it can still be politely debated--but even you say something along the lines of what Coach Gibbs says Matt says just two lines after accusing Coach Gibbs of falsely accusing Matt of calling Missouri (presumably, Missouri policies) stupid. Something along the lines of, perhaps:
You don't know what letter it is we are talking about. This is not the "Is high school quizbowl in Missouri salvageable?" post Matt made, this is a letter Matt sent outlining his problems with a specific policy of MSHSAAs that he sent out in July, the responses of which undoubtedly helped sour his opinion of Missouri to what it is today.
"Also man, find me Missouri policies actively promoting success. I certainly can't find any."
Face it, statements like this imply Missouri policies are stupid. And that's what Coach Gibbs is saying Matt is implying. As far as I can tell, nothing more.
Dude, outlining actual problems with rules logically is totally different than name-calling. Of course, this also hinges on the fact you dont know what it is we're talking about.
Speaking of which, I'm not really an authority figure, so I can't make this statement with authority behind it, but aren't we getting a little too excitable around here? As Coach Brown has already mentioned, the ownership of Questions Galore has changed, and the new owner has stated his willingness to work with us. Let's take a look at his questions before crucifying him, his company, and everything he supposedly stands for.
If Questions Galore changed ownership prior to the spring semester of 2007 (which given the timeframe Coach Brown has given seems likely), the current produced the Lexington and Helias tournaments which gave us all a horrible aversion to their product. If change was made after this date, then of course we should be much more open minded and all about it, but if it is not so, then we have every right to be very worried about the quality of these sets.
Speaking of which, Coach Gibbs, doesn't a question provider give MSHSAA and maybe MACA a sample of what sort of questions he writes before he gets approved for the bid? If so, would it be possible to have the sample provided to MSHSAA posted to this board in another thread for critiquing? If so, the owner of Questions Galore could read our comments and hopefully make necessary adjustments before they are used.
This is a very good idea.
And Charles Dees, do try and remember that regardless of what happens, you aren't personally affected by these questions anymore. Coach Gibbs and I, on the other hand, have to deal with them in 8-11 of our competitions this year (Two Saints, Washington, Warrenton, GACs, Districts, and maybe State). We have to live with these questions more than anyone else on this board. I may have to bulk up on my sewing, carpentry, and cooking knowledge soon.
I cannot fathom what you are thinking here.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6653
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

Charbroil wrote:
Why is a fake account like this allowed to post?
Yeah...in retrospect, there is a rule against this sort of thing. I think we can safely say that "QUESTIONSGALOL" has failed to identify himself...and while the satire might have been mildly amusing as an initial announcement of the news and as an expression of collective annoyance, I do think it's getting a little old.
Sorry to stray a bit from the main topic of this thread, but this is basically how I saw the use of this "gimmick account" - amusing satire when it announced the selection, but completely pointless afterward. I don't want to completely prohibit gimmick accounts, but I also don't want to leave it so vague that a particular instance gets out of hand. As long as it is clearly not the actual person it is satirizing, and one of the moderators knows who is actually behind it, I think they are acceptable (within reason, of course). However, I would agree that this one has run its course (and yes, it is also violating the identification policy).

Now back to the actual topic...
Speaking of which, Coach Gibbs, doesn't a question provider give MSHSAA and maybe MACA a sample of what sort of questions he writes before he gets approved for the bid? If so, would it be possible to have the sample provided to MSHSAA posted to this board in another thread for critiquing? If so, the owner of Questions Galore could read our comments and hopefully make necessary adjustments before they are used.
I would also like to see this.

User avatar
scphilli
Posts: 2097
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:00 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by scphilli »

Dear Charles Hang,

(Note that I only use your name specifically so as not to confuse anyone who reads this with Charles Dees.)

First of all, I can see how Matt Weiner's letter would have been interpreted that way as over the last eight years I can call to mind many examples where his vastly overwritten sarcasm has obscured otherwise meritorious points. However to play devil's advocate for a moment, what precisely is the problem with saying Missouri's policies are stupid? I fail to see how not allowing a team to potentially participate in a national tournament they earned a bid for is intelligent. I fail to see how arbitrary travel restrictions are intelligent. I fail to see how vague and overbroad definitions of what does and does not constitute academic competition and threatening sanctions when one does not participate in school-sponsored academic competition is intelligent. So before we dismiss the original points out of hand because of ill chosen rhetoric maybe we should treat them as if they have some merit.

Second, while you try to disguise it with some jest, the idea that those of us who aren't competing (aka playing "Academic Tiddliwinks" if the worst of Questions Galore is to be believed) aren't invested in what happens is flat out ignorant. We are the volunteers at these tournaments. We are the ones like Matt Chadbourne who have graciously offered services to help edit the state and district sets. We are the ones who run invitationals and who have to deal with MSHSAA as a result, and when MSHSAA acts in this manner (which if they lost Matt's bid would be incompetently), then it indicates a certain amount of hostility to our viewpoint and to us as format competition. Quizbowl means business for quite a few teams and these events do have an effect on our business.

Third, the anonymous handle has got to go. Seriously, it's nowhere near as good as nacutie (and nowhere near as pointed as RosaParks1954) and on this board, is insanely transparent who it actually is.

User avatar
scphilli
Posts: 2097
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:00 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by scphilli »

OK I just got a letter and I don't see how or why Matt Weiner thought sending THIS to the MO coaches was a "good" idea. It's just so utterly non-constructive in any way.

QUOTE:

This letter is intended for high school quizbowl coaches in Missouri.

The recent decision of the Missouri Academic Competition Advisory Committee to ban players from non-sanctioned events is absolutely incorrect and contrary to any attempt to build a quizbowl organization in your state that will benefit the students. Your own coaches' manual states that you, as coaches, are to "model and nurture a spirit of fair play and good sportsmanship for...students at all times." It also says that "Academic Competition is a pursuit which can foster intellectual growth in all students" and that each team is to "offer encouragement to other teams to do their best." Yet, the Advisory Committee has voted to punish teams who attempt to seek intellectual growth. It has consistently refused to make the quizbowl competition reward the teams who know more about quizbowl topics. That is acting against the "spirit of fair play."

Before this year, Missouri was already burdened with several rules which held back excellent players and teams in order to artificially level the playing field. Banning teams from travelling more than a certain number of miles out of state, banning teams from playing outside of certain dates, structuring the state tournament so that the best teams knocked each other out at the district level, and prohibiting players from seeking out high-level competition to test themselves against is contrary to what goes on in good high school quizbowl nationwide. The real purpose of these rules is transparent: to cripple teams who have worked hard to gain a legitimate advantage, by introducing elements of randomness to the state championship and restricting how good teams may become. The Advisory Committee is composed largely of coaches of teams who would be called "bad" if they played the type of decent high school quizbowl that reflected a range of substantial knowledge of liberal arts topics. These coaches of bad teams are voting on what to do with the handful of programs that actually care to improve themselves, and the results are coldly self-interested. It is equally obvious that the specific impetus for this rule came from participation in open tournaments by one player recently of North Kansas City, who other coaches dislike not only because of his conduct at tournaments but because he has consistently pointed out the glaring flaws in the Missouri quizbowl structure while beating their teams.

Spite is not a valid reason for re-crafting the rules in order to benefit those teams who refuse to put in the necessary work to improve. The entire quizbowl community across the country is mocking you for this backwards behavior. Missouri coaches need to learn how to create, find, play on, and succeed at good quizbowl. Instead, they seek to make the game as arbitrary as possible and introduce more rules that prevent teams from becoming good. This is called "winning at all costs" and has an entire section of your coaches' manual devoted to explaining why it is bad. There is no intellectual growth or fair play here, just gaming the system in the name of cutting down any student who dares to excel. The hypocrisy is stunning.

I have been involved in high school quizbowl for ten years. I was a bad player, then a good player, then a tournament director and editor. I have edited seven national championship tournaments and written over eight thousand quizbowl questions. I know what it takes to make a team or a state competitive; more importantly, I know how to set up the structure of quizbowl in an area so that it promotes intellectual curiosity and a healthy sense of competition among its participants. What the Advisory Committee is doing is quite clearly the opposite. By barring teams from seeking out the best possible competition, by restricting how often teams may play, by refusing to correct the ranking problem in the state tournament, and by spitefully reacting to the success of the few individuals who manage to transcend the broken system, the Advisory Committee is sending a terrible message to the students. The Committee is telling them that anyone who is good at something must be cheating. The Committee is telling them that it is of paramount importance to avoid rocking the boat or hurting someone's feelings by defeating them too handily in a competition, even if you do it in a clean way. The Committee is telling them that seeking out new challenges for oneself is unacceptable behavior. The Committee is telling them that what purports to be an open contest rewarding the team with more knowledge is in fact decided in back rooms, by people voting in the most naked self-interest. If the cynical message that this behavior sends about the workings of the world is true, then even having high school extracurricular activities is a waste of time, because all is lost.

I ask you to please prevail on the Advisory Committee to reverse this recent decision, as well as the qualification method for the state tournament and the travel and date-restriction rules, as soon as possible. Removing the restrictions on improvement is the only way to bring your state's teams into parity with the rest of the country. More importantly, it is the only way to live up to the principles stated in your manual and turn high school quizbowl into an intellectually and competitively rewarding activity for the students.

If anyone wants to discuss the benefits of good high school quizbowl, or how to create it, with me, I can be reached at the address below.



Matt Weiner

END QUOTE

I would like to say to anyone who would like to make arguments that persuade people who are not inclined to your beliefs: don't do it like this. Seriously. Even if you are trying to shame people into doing what you believe is the "right thing" don't do it so that the people against whom they are to be shamed (their students, the public, etc.) are wholly ignorant of the fact. There was just nothing constructive about any of this.

Charbroil
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charbroil »

However to play devil's advocate for a moment, what precisely is the problem with saying Missouri's policies are stupid?
I don't have any problems with saying that Missouri's policies are stupid, as a matter of fact. I was just commenting that the outrage of Charles Dees at Coach's Gibbs' assertion that Matt Weiner thought Missouri Quiz Bowl policy was stupid was unreasonable. After all, Coach Gibbs wasn't saying that Matt Weiner was taking a personal swipe at Missouri, he was just saying that Matt Weiner disliked everything about Missouri Quiz Bowl policies, whereas Charles Dees seemed to be getting outraged that Coach Gibbs was implying that Matt Weiner was taking a personal swipe at Missouri.

Whether it's legitimate to say that Missoui's policies are stupid is utterly beside the point--I actually agree with you on a number of your points.
Second,  while you try to disguise it with some jest, the idea that those of us who aren't competing (aka playing "Academic Tiddliwinks" if the worst of Questions Galore is to be believed) aren't invested in what happens is flat out ignorant.
I know that people outside of the actual Quiz Bowl playing community have an investment in the quality of Missouri Quiz Bowl and I appreciate that. I was actually trying to politely note that if people like me who have to play the questions can remain calm and civil, those who are merely commentating should be able to do so as well. Apologies for being a touch unclear.
Long letter from Matt Weiner
You don't know what letter it is we are talking about. This is not the "Is high school quizbowl in Missouri salvageable?" post Matt made, this is a letter Matt sent outlining his problems with a specific policy of MSHSAAs that he sent out in July, the responses of which undoubtedly helped sour his opinion of Missouri to what it is today.
Assuming that this is the aforementioned letter, the overall sentiment does seem to be that Missouri policies are stupid, as Coach Gibbs said it was--which isn't necessarily untrue. Coach Gibbs' point that just because Matt Weiner dislikes Missouri policies, he shouldn't submit a bid, does seem rather illogical, though.

User avatar
redliberte
Posts: 426
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by redliberte »

Charbroil wrote: but aren't we getting a little too excitable around here?
Isn't that what always happens around here?

KentB
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Creve Couer, MO
Contact:

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by KentB »

I haven't read much of the last page. In fact, this whole argument is starting to bore me hardcore.

Charbroil
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by Charbroil »

I haven't read much of the last page. In fact, this whole argument is starting to bore me hardcore. 
I know exactly what you mean. That was why I was hoping we could get a copy of the actual questions used in the bid...it would give us something substantial to argue about. As it is now, we're just arguing over shadows--what may or may not have happened in back room meetings and what was or was not received by various organizations.

richbob
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by richbob »

For everyone's information:

The 2008 Lexington Invitational Tournament was written by The Question Bank, not Questions Galore.

Questions Galore did write the 2007 Lexington Invitational Tournament. I believe that the current owner wrote those questions, but I am not 100% sure of this fact.

Sincerely,

Bob Brown
The Question Bank
Richland High School

AShoaib
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by AShoaib »

Well, our coach is going to the Maca meeting... what comments he's bringing up, I dunno. John, do you have any idea of some specific things you're gonna bring up?

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

2009 MSHSAA contract

Post by FZW Coach »

I haven't read this for a while. Looks like things got a little crazy in here.

I don't really have time to read everything, but if Matt was offended, I appologize. Whoever made the connection between my comment on Matt's letter and his bid is kind of silly. I was just kind of poking him since no one has ever sent out such a harsh letter to coaches before. It just seemed odd that he would want to try to work with us.

Oh well. I have to run to teach class here at the college.

Post Reply