Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

[G Mark]

Traditionally, we field 10 teams each year - 3 sets of 3 and last year's winner. We often get the same teams year after year. Problem is, when we field an unproven new team, they more often than not get clobbered badly. I'm thinking of doing some "qualifier" rounds - somewhat like American Idol, where we can weed out the lamers and get some new blood on stage. What are your thoughts?
- cool, let's do team qualifiers
- cool, let's do individual qualifiers and then make teams from those with a clue
- naw, I'm too busy drinking and partying during the day to bother.

[shrdlu]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

Traditionally, we field 10 teams each year - 3 sets of 3 and last year's winner. We often get the same teams year after year. Problem is, when we field an unproven new team, they more often than not get clobbered badly. I'm thinking of doing some "qualifier" rounds - somewhat like American Idol, where we can weed out the lamers and get some new blood on stage. What are your thoughts?.

I'm glad that someone's decided to look at this. It would be a lot more fun to watch the first evening if there was some potential for seeing Bobcat et al being crushed on the second night.

- cool, let's do team qualifiers

You might have the most luck with this, but then you have the problem of finding adequate teams for the competition. I wonder how you currently qualify teams; I thought that there was some small barrier to entry, but it sounds like there is not. I think that this is your best overall option.

- cool, let's do individual qualifiers and then make teams from those with a clue

You may have more luck here, but it seems that you'd end up with strangers attempting to become team members, and multiple people who were plenty smart alone, but not good at being team members.

- naw, I'm too busy drinking and partying during the day to bother

That sounds like the description of 1/4 of defcon, and 90% of those who end up attending HJ.

[astcell]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

The one year when a category was GET SMART, boy I knew I blew it by not being on a team. I could write those scripts from memory.

Then again I did have a bad experience on the Newlywed Game....

[hackajar]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

Added monitors in front of contestance would help a lot. I found myself compleatly turned around looking at Google map images, from an angle. While audenice was like "Duh" all contenstance on stage were only getting a 30o angle. That might actually fix a lot of weeding out idiots, as well can get clear idea of what answer is.

[MitchMitchem]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

I don't think individual qualifiers would be that good. I know out of the people on my team, I probably know the least when it comes to hacker trivia, but I can out drink all three people on my team...combined.

[ForSwitch]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

cool, let's do individual qualifiers and then make teams from those with a clue

That may actually be a good idea. While I like the group I hang out with, I remember spending a great deal of time with them at the last con. Part of the con is meeting with new people. A setup of HJ with qualified individuals randomly placed on a team would do just that.

[ink]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

When would the qualifying rounds happen? HJ already takes up Friday and Saturday evenings; are we thinking Thursday, or something online?

[larsu]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

When would the qualifying rounds happen? HJ already takes up Friday and Saturday evenings; are we thinking Thursday, or something online?

One option would be to do an online qualifier, similar to CTF. The timelimit to answer (question) after seeing the question (answer) would need to be short, and some method of preventing people from seeing the answer (question), taking time to look up the question (answer), registering a new name, and qualifying under the new name.

[billygoto]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

- cool, let's do team qualifiers.

I like that idea. A good team is more than the sum of its parts.
If a team is well-chosen, they'll have carefully selected diversity to
cover each other's asses.
Seems to me that individual quals + random assignment wouldn't
really show that sort of strategy. I don't know. I think the quality
of the teams would suffer if they were randomized.

If you have team quals, I think a fairly easy test would weed out a
lot of crap contestants, so that's a great idea... But it will take a lot
of work to manage the process. Maybe a brief pre-con skype
interview.... Maybe something like this.

[ForSwitch]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

Perhaps a "best of both worlds" approach would be the best. Half the teams will be, "hey, I know you" teams. The other teams are composed of people who have proven themselves "intelligent," and randomly allocated. Pit the two groups against each other. Add alcohol. Hilarity ensues.

This would allow for people who know bunches of intelligent people to compete, and also allows geeks without geeky contacts to put up a showing at HJ.

[hackajar]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

You know they had the "World Series of Pop Culture" thing on VH1. And all the teams were pre-made except for one that was built of people who applied over the Internet.

(And they made it to "final four")

[dYn4mic]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

I think it would add a lot to see some good teams go up to compete. Seems like the same 6-10 people every year. Not to say they're no good or not entertaining but fresh blood would be good.

It might be funny to add a "celebrity jeopardy" team comprised of "seasoned/popular" speakers. Kinda a "Joes versus Pros" aspect. This could prove hard to cordinate/recruit.

I'm guessing the qualifying would be open for people to watch? And does this mean more teams will be accepted into the "pool"?

[larsu]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

I think it would add a lot to see some good teams go up to compete. Seems like the same 6-10 people every year. Not to say they're no good or not entertaining but fresh blood would be good.

It might be funny to add a "celebrity jeopardy" team comprised of "seasoned/popular" speakers. Kinda a "Joes versus Pros" aspect. This could prove hard to cordinate/recruit.

I'm guessing the qualifying would be open for people to watch? And does this mean more teams will be accepted into the "pool"?

OK, here's what we're doing. We'll take entries this year from teams and individuals. We'll put assemble the individuals into teams, and invite everyone to go through qualifiers Friday afternoon. Obviously, it's less important for the "same 6-10 people every year" to do the qualifiers, since we know their skill/entertainment factor. But it'll be a chance for us to see new people and teams without just throwing them on stage and watching them fail in front of a crowd.

I love the celebrity jeopardy idea. I'll run it by the other HJ organizers, and see if we can work it out. If we can, I imagine it'll be a last minute thing.

I was thinking the qualifiers would be closed to the public. Just because I don't know if we'll have a good location, and I wasn't planning on putting much work into making it entertaining. If lots of people want it to be open, I'll reconsider.

[billygoto]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

OK, here's what we're doing. We'll take entries this year from teams and individuals. We'll put assemble the individuals into teams, and invite everyone to go through qualifiers Friday afternoon. Obviously, it's less important for the "same 6-10 people every year" to do the qualifiers, since we know their skill/entertainment factor. But it'll be a chance for us to see new people and teams without just throwing them on stage and watching them fail in front of a crowd.

Hmm.. So that's still allowing teams, but expanding the qualification process to include
individuals without a team, so they can have one appointed to them.
As long as full, self-assembled teams can still apply, I'm for it.
This idea expands the pool of qualified teams, and this is good.

There's still a choice to make:

• Do you qualify INDIVIDUALS before assembling them into ad-hoc pre-qualified teams? Or,
• Do you make random groups of 3 individuals and then have the resulting ad-hoc team
  do the qualifier along with all the other teams?

The latter seems a bit more democratic, because it gives 'team' applicants the same
test conditions as individuals (ie: the team is tested as a synergistic whole) and sounds
like less administrative work. But it could stick good individuals with crummy assigned
teammates, which was what we were sort of trying to avoid in the first place.

If you wanted to go nuts about it, I guess you could test individuals, make ad-hoc
teams from the qualified individuals, and then qualify those teams along with the
team applicants.

I'm probably geeking this up more than it's worth.

PS: If only you could pre-test their ability to hold their damned liquor!

[larsu]

Re: Poll: Do you think we should have HJ qualifier rounds?

[*]Do you make random groups of 3 individuals and then have the resulting ad-hoc team
do the qualifier along with all the other teams?

That is what I was thinking, except with the possibility of qualifying individuals that would then be assembled onto new teams. So, individual signs up, gets placed on somewhat random team for qualifiers, plays well, and gets put onto new, better team for the night games.