Re: Gary, Pam, Tuna--re breaking brackets

[DRTUNA@aol.com]

"--As I heard the vote, it was 40-35 in favor of breaking brackets."

Not what I heard, or the minutes.

"--After the vote, like Ken Bahm, I heard Steve (and a member or two on the
council) say he would not break brackets at this year's nationals because it
wasn't in the invitation--not because the vote failed (which would have been
what I would have expected to hear had the vote failed)."

The vote was advisory. Steve would have done it at his discretion if it had
been in the invite, but it wasn't.

"--After the meeting, I spoke with Steve Hunt and asked him what he was
going to do about breaking brackets.  I asked this because I wasn't entirely
clear about what had occurred and because I had twice tried to ask during
the meeting itself but was not called upon. Steve told me that he would not
institute the breaking brackets at this year's tournament because it was not
in the invitation. I believe I also remarked that "so we'll start breaking
brackets next year" to which Steve agreed (though I'm not certain about
this)."

The President can do that. Pam can do that next year.

The advisory nature of the vote is what caused the confusion I believe.

Best,

Tuna

---

• Prev by Date: Re: More than bracket breaking
• Next by Date: Re: More than bracket breaking
• Prev by thread: Re: Plan-Plan=laziness
• Next by thread: Requests for Topics.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page