Tho I'm all for world unity, a test evening won't prove much. Before the Houston97 (SOWPODS) tournament, I had spent several months studying British without having played any in real life. I hardly played any at all, even tho I knew a fair amount. It takes a lot of time to start throwing the new words down. Now take away the studying part AND the 2000 part and you got the club experiment. One night will not prove much. And then to poll the "informed" membership as to whether SOWPODS is good or bad is silly. Granted, this is all putative, but I categorically reject any answers by novitiates other than "needs more information." Seriously, it makes statistical sense to only query those who have actually played it a great deal and base a decision on the "informedoriate."

Without a doubt, the best way to implement something like this is by fiat. There are many reasons to look to Jan 1, 2000 as a good date, not the least of which is that by that date the OSW'ers are all doing so. Another uptick is that when the world computing infrastructure collapses, it should give ample time for the rank and file to learn the 2s and 3s at least. (Better make those lists now, tho!)

On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Jim Miller wrote:

 MBaron1949@aol.com wrote:

 
   Though I have been a former club director for over five years now, 
   presumably any of you *active* club directors out there can try a 
   SOWPODS evening or two at your club. An evening's trial, with a list 
   of OSW-only 2s and 3s at players' disposal, will give players some 
   exposure to SOWPODS play, thereby becoming more informed on the matter, 
   particularly if and when it may be put to a player referendum.
 
 
 ...and confuse the hell out of people, especially beginning players.
 Given all the discussion that goes on here about how club directors
 can treat their members with care, wouldn't it make sense to list
 some precautions that could be taken, before rushing into this gung-ho?
 
 But this whole idea of a test evening seems really wacky anyway.  What
 is it that players are supposed to be evaluating while they're taking
 part in this, exactly?  How many more times they bingo?  How many times
 they go, "ooh, what a strange word"?  The ecstatic joy of finding out
 they missed a Welsh regionalism?  The mouthfeel?  There's no mandate
 or particular guidance that Greenport is giving to any of this...I suppose
 this ambiguity is perfectly intentional.  What are the issues to be
 considered?  What's important in making Scrabble a good game?  The
 number of words one can play, the ease of playing off the Q?  I suspect
 it's a lot more complex than any of that.  How can a player make a
 good decision about a change like this from an evening or two of play?
 
 -Jim
 (The fact that my sentiments largely reflect Steve Oliger's is purely coincidence.)

Last Modified 9/25/00

Back to Scrabble Correspondence Page
Back to Scrabble Main Page
Back to Jim's Main Page