dxdtdemon wrote:Have Drew Scheeler and Steve Oppenheim played Super Acronym yet? If not, I have a feeling you can get three players from the ScheelerD branch on LearnedLeague to play it...
Link to the announcement and any mirrors.I hate to do the old "link to a page just so you can read it for yourself" trick, but right now that's the best I (or anyone here not named Drew or Steve) can do on the matter. I don't know where it's going to get mirrored, and I don't know what Drew and Steve's plans are over this summer.
dxdtdemon wrote:...if you give us enough advance notice.
So at the risk of sounding really defensive or hysterical, I feel like now is a good time for me to politely and gently establish so we're all on the same page now, in May, and not scrambling like headless chickens in July: as much 'work' as I'm doing right now on this thread and in trying to get an idea of how much things like Super ACRONYM cost and when it'll be available,
I can not do all of the work here. Folks, I'd love for Battle Buzz happen and I'm willing to put in a lot of work to help make it happen: but I need help here.
I know we're all busy in each of our own ways, especially during the summer, but I am probably busier than most people when it comes to
this summer in particular given some situations I have to attend to that need not be expanded upon in a public forum. I'm going to be so busy, that me dedicating time to herd cattle and figure out who can be in Columbus on a certain date (which, in previous years, has taken
weeks to do) would be a
pretty irresponsible way for me to utilize my time, energy and resources. There are some things I
can do, because I can knock it out in the matter of a late night internet session (like correspond with set writers; create surveys for 'what do you want to play'; and help create a schedule once we land on a date.) But I can't be dedicating a couple of hours every couple of days, which in turn segues into a couple of weeks, sifting through the summer schedules of people to find the best possible date. Additionally, I would love for Drew and Steve to come play: I would love for as many people, anyone really, to come play; however, I'm not going to bend over backwards until my mouth hits my patella (when more pressing responsibilities are calling) just to figure out a date that works for both them and 'the most amount of people' possible. If it means we don't have the interest to justify Super ACRONYM (which, don't get me wrong, I'd like to play it but I won't be heartbroken if we don't have the numbers to justify it), then so be it.
I apologize if that's a long-winded and <heavy> way to explain myself, but my hands only stretch so far before what's in their control falls out of them, and I feel its best for me to explain now that if we want to make this happen, it needs to be a team effort.
If no one steps up and helps me, then I'm rinsing my hands of this immediately and there will not be a Battle Buzz. If someone could be so generous as to create a spreadsheet (I am not tech-savvy in the least bit) with the dates and to which we could plug in our availability, that would be
very _helpful_.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
dxdtdemon wrote:As for Mike Cheyne's comment, it seems like a common trend of trash tossups in recent years is to use lead-ins that were things that had some level of notability in a time before the field's target age would've been following whatever the answer is. An example of this was a tossup on the Atlanta Falcons at MSNCT that brought up the Dirty Bird [for younger readers, this was a famous touchdown celebration that they did in the playoffs leading up to the 1999 Super Bowl] in the lead-in. The gettability in age discrepancy in lead-ins isn't usually that egregious, but it probably sounds like a good idea to have mixed-age teams if possible.
Okay, yeah - that makes sense. The way that I read it was some of the tossups are, unintentionally - of course, written where the clues are 'anti-pyramidal'; inherently easy clues on the basis of accomplishment (and not chronology) appearing before inherently harder clues on the basis of accomplishment (and not chronology.)