[CI] Protest and my TemperTantrum

[Patrick Griffin]

Pretty good reasoning for C9-3, and of course there’s a need to
accommodate the league’s task allocation and timing. But it leaves the
door open to two things:

1) If this happens enough times, there’s the possibility that a player or
a team start protesting every rejected answer that they feel vaguely sure
about, which would make the QA's and the statistician’s jobs that much
harder. 

2) A team losing a game, especially in a finals qualification situation,
because they supposedly “snoozed” when in fact they answered the question
correctly, doesn’t seem fair.

Granted, none of these situations apply here: Nicholheads won that game
anyhow. Paul knew the background to his answer, so his protest was based
on a sure thing in his mind — while Lindsay said that pissing-boy is what
she always heard that statue called, but she didn’t protest because she
thought it may have just been a tongue-in-cheek naming thing.

Cheers,

Patrick




On 2015-06-24, 4:13 PM, "Theresa Polyakov" <theresa.polyakov at gmail.com>
wrote:

>I agree with Mark on this.
>If you felt strongly enough you would have protested. When you had the
>chance.
>We have lost out a few times in just the past few games for not
>protesting but lines need to be drawn somewhere.
>Can we call that rule "snooze you lose"?
>Cheers 
>Theresa
>On Jun 24, 2015 4:07 PM, "Mark Brader" <msb at vex.net> wrote:
>
>> So how about a rule that if a
>> protest is accepted, people who answered the question right (as per
>> accepted protest) should get the appropriate number of points for it?
>
>In fact we already have the opposite as an explicit rule (rule C9,
>point 3):  "Protests made at one game do not affect the scoring of
>other games".
>
>I and my team have been bitten by this situation more than once over
>the years, but it really is a more practical rule.  Protests need
>to be recorded while it's fresh in everyone's mind exactly what
>was said.  It may take days after a protest, sometimes even longer,
>before a ruling is issued and players hear about it.  If people
>then make delayed protests on the basis of the ruling, they may not
>remember exactly what happened, and if the delayed protest involves a
>judgment call such as "close enough?", that can take even more time.
>
>A further issue is that when the league statistician issues the stats
>with "all protests resolved", it means people will know that they're
>correct.  Allowing a delayed protest could alter the result of a game,
>maybe even affect who gets in the Final.
>
>So I say keep the present rule.
>--
>Mark Brader | "No, I'm disagreeing with you.  That doesn't mean I'm not
>msb at vex.net |  listening to you or understanding what you're saying:
>Toronto     |  I'm doing all three at the same time."   -- Aaron Sorkin
>
>_______________________________________________
>Inquisition mailing list
>Inquisition at cfaj.ca
>http://cfaj.ca/mailman/listinfo/inquisition_cfaj.ca
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Inquisition mailing list
>Inquisition at cfaj.ca
>http://cfaj.ca/mailman/listinfo/inquisition_cfaj.ca