Page 3 of 3

Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:35 pm
by Chris
Fair enough Andrew. I do try and give the point if the 'answerer' has demonstrated relevant knowledge AND it is reasonable to allow it. However, and I don't recall taking this line on Saturday (but have on occasion), I'm at pains to be stingy if I suspect someone's been deliberately vague in order to cover multiple options.

Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 12:25 pm
by thegreed
Just an idea, but would there be scope for answers like 'Korea' in Andrew's example to be awarded 0.1 rather than the full mark at the setter's discretion? In this way getting the answer correct but unspecific enough gains some potential reward for finishing position but not a full point. I seem to remember having a similar case earlier this year when I argued for the acceptance of 'blood' as well as 'pigs' blood' as an answer. Also, apologies for my no-show in Rolleston - money is tight at the moment. I'm determined to make Coventry however.



Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 3:33 pm
by Chris
Cheers Sam. Not a bad idea in itself. However, I fear we'd get inundated with requests on many more questions if there were was scope to do that. I can also forsee adding-up errors, 0.1 being counted as 1.0, etc..

Maybe something to trial in the future?

Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:10 pm
by Ambassador
I hope this can be made to work.

I have to be cautious about Falcon's view that consensus in the room can necessarily be a reliable guide. On the language question, some of the most vociferous rejectors of the alternative answer based themselves on the assumption that it did not satisfy the requirement to be a Romance language. Which it is; the moot point is whether it has a distinct existence, which is a political question. It has sufficient self-identifying speakers to meet a commonly accepted criteria. As a philologist, I felt pretty bruised. As a political scientist with a specialism in the region, doubly so. When there is expertise in the room, it should at least be consulted, if not always agreed with.

Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:25 pm
by neilmac
The appeals panel idea sounds worth a trial. Disputed answers can happen due to - question setter not being aware of alternative answers - or the incorrect answer is given in the source the question setter uses, or ambiguous wording allowing several possible answers. The QM has a hard task since he/she may not know if the appeal is valid particularly when asked to make an instant ruling with people shouting out so a panel with access to the internet, able to spend a reasonable length of time considering the appeals, could be the answer. I've seen it work in other quizzes.

TBH we don't get that many genuinely disputed answers - maybe 2 or 3 in every 240 question quiz? I think the quality control is excellent as it is - but it's never going to be 100%.

Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:36 am
by Bronson
There must surely be room to question the questions (and not just question the answers)!

I remember one question once which had this in it: "Which author's daughter...". I therefore thought that the question was asking for the daughter, whereas many others thought it was asking for the name of the author. Thankfully, the wise marker gave me the mark anyway as it was not clear who was being asked for and fortunately they have the same surname, though I also put her forename.

So I endorse the policy of underlying the word or words which focus the quizzers on what is being asked at heart.

Failing that, then re-wording questions to remove ambiguity might help, such as, "His daughter is famous for blah, blah, blah...who is the author who..."

During the last quiz, which I enjoyed very immensely...thanks John...there was a question asking to identify a porn actor. I knew that his 'stage' (bed?) name is Ron Jeremy, but I remembered on a TV documentary that his father told him that he could do what he liked in the porn business but that he should not use his surname so as not to besmirch the family name. I could not remember the surname, so left the answer as 'Ron Jeremy'. We are normally told to put the surname and 'Jeremy' is his middle name, not surname. I have since checked and his surname at birth is Hyatt. A nasty questioner might only accept Hyatt. Hence why I questioned this question during the quiz. I suspect that if anybody had put 'Hyatt' and nothing else as the answer, this would have been marked as wrong since it was not offered as an option, as I recall. Looking it up immediately afterwards was not recommended as the way forward, so somebody with too much knowledge might have got punished!

Incidentally, regarding the coelacanth (spelling?), I was very annoyed to get this wrong with my answer of South Africa, as I had stumbled across this in research a year or two back and was confident that I was right. But, hey, mistakes happen...and I am living proof of that in that I always get more wrong that right in the quizzes, but it does not stop them being entertaining nonetheless.

However, I do not agree with NOT allowing people to check out things over the Internet...after all, how are they meant to gather evidence to make an appeal?

In a recent pub quiz in London, a question asked what a 'strop' was used for. My quizzing pal and I both came out with the same answer instantly that it was a whip of some sort, so used to punish people. When the QM said that the answer was that it is used to sharpen blades and knives, I could not believe that we had both got it wrong, especially as my team-mate is a much better quizzer than me. A quick check at showed us both to have been mistaken, so no appeal was put forward by us. So allowing Internet searches after the quiz is not always bad.

At the last British Quiz at Derby, I was stunned that David Niven was not allowed as the answer for somebody being put up for the role of James Bond. I accept that my answer was not the best, since the question said that the actor in question was born in Ireland, and I presume that Niven was not. I only mention this since only last night I was watching the Bond Theme Tune Gala on the BBC I-Player and Honor Blackman mentioned both Niven and other actors, including the one born in Ireland (whose name escapes me, though I can visualise his face!) as candidates for the part. Co-incidence or what?!

I used to mark 'A' level Business Studies papers. At one standardisation meeting we were told to give full marks if candidates put a particular answer. I argued that the answer was wrong (and should therefore score zero, not full marks) as it was against British law and therefore legally false! After the Chief Examiner had a think about it, he let it stand and I was told that as I was an accountant I knew too much!!! So a well prepared, and properly taught student, would be punished for knowing the truth, even if the examiners did not! I recounted this to a friend who is both a qualified barrister and solicitor and he could not believe the spectacular ignorance of the examination board. I do not blame them as so many business studies textbooks either get the point wrong or are vague, leading teachers/students to get the matter wrong.

On '15 to 1', the card with the question had the answer on it AND three sources confirming the answer in case anybody argued with William G Stewart. However, I recall one episode asking what the name of a particular place was where an event from D-Day happened. The contestant gave an answer and was told that he was wrong. After the break, WGS said that the card he had named the local town/village, whereas the contestant had named the exact beach, so the contestant's answer was more specific than they had expected. Fortunately, the chap was allowed back, but even paying people to set quizzes and to verify them can still get them wrong!

We should allow appeals direct to Chris, if he has set the quiz, as there are only rare occasions when he is questioned due to the quality of the research. However, when set by others, particularly where other setters are not present, then we must have a system in place to appeal.

Re: GP Individual Quiz Appeals Panel?

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 7:31 pm
by Chris
Some good points in there John, and experiences I can sympathise with.

What I said about googling as answers are being read-out was in relation to the occasional past scenario wherein persons have consulted the web and then sought to argue the point with me, i.e. before we move-on to the next genre. I have no problem with people consulting the web if it is in pursuit of evidence to support an appeal lodged within an agreed framework. So, however, I'm concerned not to have to delay moving-on because people want me to wait while they forlornly trawl the web in pursuit of some glimmer of hope they can mount a challenge.

I'm going to issue everyone with an extra fly-sheet tomorrow, with instructions printed on the back (because I know people must be tired of listening to me over the mic. - well, that's the conclusion I've come to, based on the percentage of instructions that are followed.). Hopefully this will clarify precisely what can be challenged, and how.

A note for everyone here: please remember, this is a limited pilot exercise to see if we can make it work. We don't want it to be onerous or too time consuming. I appreciate you may sincerely and sagely think there are other aspects/ways in which this process can develop, but for now, let's just see if we can make this admittedly limited approach work for us. Thanks!

Reference queries at Altofts.

1. We allowed the query on Suerat/Neo-Impressionism, accepting "Divisionism" or "Chromo-Luminarism. Two people benefited from this ruling.

2 We did not allow Andalucia, Kingdom of Granada, or Moorish Spain.

Gareth and Kathryn looked at this one and came up with exactly the same answer as the setter (i.e. me!). Only "Al Andalus" or "Moorish Iberia" (being generous) was allowed. The following, garnered later from t'internet also supports....

"The Oxford Dictionary of Islam Edited by John L. Esposito
Publisher: Oxford University Press Print Publication Date: 2003 Print ISBN-13: 9780195125580 Published to Oxford Reference: 2003 Current Online Version: 2012 eISBN: 9780199891207
"Andalus, al-
Those parts of the Iberian peninsula governed by Muslims from 711 to 1492. Locus of the most prolonged encounter between Islam and Christendom, traces of which can be found in the Spanish and Portuguese languages, art, and architecture, and the governance models of colonial Mexico and South America. Some of the finest cultural accomplishments of Islam emerged in al-Andalus: the great mosque of Córdoba, the Alhambra of Seville, the Cuenca school of ivory carving, the philosophy of Ibn Rushd (Averroës), and the medicine of Ibn Zuhr. The period also held significant Jewish cultural productivity (Maimonides). The golden age ended around the eleventh century; thereafter, Christian military might pushed the frontier south to Granada, conquered in 1492 (the Reconquista)."