rpg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 2:50 am
Pretty tough.
I have a minor writing quibble with this question: "26 years after winning Olympic gold, at age 45 he became the oldest heavyweight champion in boxing history." because it doesn't specify when this happened-- I think it'd be a little clearer to say something like "26 years after winning gold in '68, ...". I think the general convention on Jeopardy is that if the category is about a specific year/date then the events in the clues are things that took place on that year/date unless otherwise specified. You could misread this question as saying that he won the title in '68.
Winning Olympic gold and becoming heavyweight champion happen at different events. Nothing is ambiguous about that clue.
OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:33 am
I certainly hope the judges plan on accepting the location name only for the 2-pointer, for those of us who do not wish to type the name of the team.
flutist319 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 2:52 pm
It took me ages to come up with "aesthetician" -- at first I could only think of "cosmetologist" (13) and "beautician" (10). Had to let my subconscious work on it for a couple hours (and studiously avoid anything beauty-related on the Internet during that time :lol: ).
Aesthetician has come up on Jeopardy.
I…didn't say it hadn't?
My intention was not to say something objective about the clue. Isn't sharing our own impressionistic experiences of the questions one of the functions of this thread? That's why I read it, anyway.
I should have added that I came up with the correct answer on SHC because I'd earlier seen "aesthetician" (and gotten it wrong) on Jeopardy. Didn't mean to offend.
rpg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 2:50 am
Pretty tough.
I have a minor writing quibble with this question: "26 years after winning Olympic gold, at age 45 he became the oldest heavyweight champion in boxing history." because it doesn't specify when this happened-- I think it'd be a little clearer to say something like "26 years after winning gold in '68, ...". I think the general convention on Jeopardy is that if the category is about a specific year/date then the events in the clues are things that took place on that year/date unless otherwise specified. You could misread this question as saying that he won the title in '68.
Winning Olympic gold and becoming heavyweight champion happen at different events. Nothing is ambiguous about that clue.
I definitely misread that question, and didn't even realize it until now. But I don't really have an issue with it.
For the R1, D6 10-pointer, I see a bunch of people responded "arbitration." But as a lawyer who's written about this issue, I know that an arbitration provision doesn't necessarily preclude class actions. Class arbitration is a thing. A waiver provision (my response) -- i.e., waiver of class actions -- is the only way to categorically prevent plaintiffs from maintaining class proceedings.
And, googling, I find references to the CFPB's rule prohibiting "class action waivers in pre-dispute arbitration clauses." You can still have an arbitration clause without a class action waiver in it if you're a financial services firm.
Regardless of the intended response, I submit that my response of waiver is accurate and should be accepted. And indeed, just "arbitration provision" is wrong, since arbitration clauses themselves have not been prohibited by the rule. The vast majority of consumer claims against financial service firms will continue to be brought through the vehicle of arbitrations rather than judicial actions.
Last edited by hbomb1947 on Sun Aug 06, 2017 2:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hbomb1947 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:52 pm
For the R1, D6 10-pointer, I see a bunch of people responded "arbitration." But as a lawyer who's written about this issue, I know that an arbitration provision doesn't necessarily preclude class actions. Class arbitration is a thing. A waiver provision (my response) -- i.e., waiver of class actions -- is the only way to categorically prevent plaintiffs from maintaining class proceedings.
And, googling, I find references to the CFPB's rule prohibiting "class action waivers in pre-dispute arbitration clauses." You can still have an arbitration clause without a class action waiver in it if you're a financial services firm.
Regardless of the intended response, I submit that my response of waiver is accurate and should be accepted. And indeed, just "arbitration provision" is wrong, since arbitration clauses have not been completely prohibited by the rule.
ETA: I think the wording of the clue is also ambiguous. The rule prevents financial services firms from using arbitration provisions to block class actions, in a sense -- but only to the extent that the firm can't insert a class action waiver in the arbitration provision. So, again, "class action waivers" (which happen to be written into the arbitration clause) as a way to block class actions are what has been banned, and "waiver" is a correct response to the wording of the clue.
hbomb1947 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:52 pm
For the R1, D6 10-pointer, I see a bunch of people responded "arbitration." But as a lawyer who's written about this issue, I know that an arbitration provision doesn't necessarily preclude class actions. Class arbitration is a thing. A waiver provision (my response) -- i.e., waiver of class actions -- is the only way to categorically prevent plaintiffs from maintaining class proceedings.
And, googling, I find references to the CFPB's rule prohibiting "class action waivers in pre-dispute arbitration clauses." You can still have an arbitration clause without a class action waiver in it if you're a financial services firm.
Regardless of the intended response, I submit that my response of waiver is accurate and should be accepted. And indeed, just "arbitration provision" is wrong, since arbitration clauses themselves have not been prohibited by the rule. The vast majority of consumer claims against financial service firms will continue to be brought through the vehicle of arbitrations rather than judicial actions.
I don't know; I still think that "arbitration" is an appropriate response to the clue, but I'd agree completely that this is a good example of something way too complicated for what is supposed to a fun exercise while we're waiting for a new season. I appreciate the time and effort of those writing these clues out, but the level of knowledge needed for many of them - including 2 and 3 pointers - is a bit over the top. And this is a perfect example; even lawyers who have some experience with this very specific issue could debate what was intended, what's appropriate, etc. If it's esoteric even for practitioners, it's a bit too complicated for most folks.
I don't think this is advocating for "dumbing down" the clues - just a call for them to be a little more generalized rather than specialized knowledge.
Arbitration (clause/provision) was the intended correct answer for the 10-pointer.
I'm considering a RQ given the variety of incorrect responses that suggested that the clue was unclear as to the intended correct answer (examples include "waiver", "terms of service", and "disclaimer"). Otherwise, I believe the clue accurately summarizes the rule, which doesn't outright prohibit arbitration clauses (it just prohibits several ways of using them to prevent a class action from going forward), nor does it cover non-arbitration class waivers (because the statutory authority only extends to arbitration). Difficulty-wise, the clue appeared to be fine (26/13/47).
Finally, I've been looking at the conversion stats to check the correctness of the difficulty. I want the clues to be a mix of straightforward clues and more challenging clues, while keeping all the clues interesting and fun. The category on the Civil War clearly missed the mark, and I apologize for it. I want to do better.
rjaguar3 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:26 pm
Arbitration (clause/provision) was the intended correct answer for the 10-pointer.
I'm considering a RQ given the variety of incorrect responses that suggested that the clue was unclear as to the intended correct answer (examples include "waiver", "terms of service", and "disclaimer"). Otherwise, I believe the clue accurately summarizes the rule, which doesn't outright prohibit arbitration clauses (it just prohibits several ways of using them to prevent a class action from going forward), nor does it cover non-arbitration class waivers (because the statutory authority only extends to arbitration). Difficulty-wise, the clue appeared to be fine (26/13/47).
Well, since the correct description of the rule is "prohibits class action waivers in arbitration clauses," then since "arbitration" was accepted, at the very least "waiver" should be accepted too. In the alternative, yes, I think there should be an RQ.
kerryoakie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2017 12:26 pm
Biology was a welcomed category for this trained biomedical engineer after that brutal day 4. Though I am kicking myself for missing supercilious...
Anyone else thrown off a little bit by the ATP question? I was confused if they were looking for just ATP or needed adenosine triphosphate (I put both, just in case).
I also entered both, just in case. Flashed back to a high school classroom with a Ben Stein-like teacher droning on about Krebs cycles and phosphorylation and ADP and ATP.... the material was fascinating and memorable. The teacher was also memorable, but not because he was fascinating..... First time I've thought about him in half a century.
I also entered both though I'm fairly certain that ATP alone would be fine. I'm just happy that cmp146 called it an energy currency rather than an energy source. I am constantly fighting with my biology colleagues over that semantic distinction.
I intended either ATP or adenosine triphosphate to count. I also do not like the term "energy source" for ATP as a biochemist. However those high energy phosphate bonds sure are handy for chemical reactions!
Last edited by cmp146 on Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Cat Hammarskjold wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:15 pm
I'm just wondering why multiple people guessed the Indianapolis Colts on the Redskins question.
Not to speak for those who guessed the Colts, but perhaps a horse to colt connection?
Pro-Football, Inc. v. Blackhorse
I have not gone through all the answers. Anyone guess Broncos with some kind of similar logic?
That's what got me there.
Me as well, I was thinking that Blackhorse was a company and would be in conflict with a horse-related NFL team. I should have come at it from the trademark side, knowing the Redskins have been in court lately, and if the clue had included Blackhorse's first name I would not have gone for a horse-related NFL team name. I passed on Colts because their trademark is a horseshoe while the Broncos is an actual horse.
I'm going to leave this spoiler-free since people are still answering it, but on that new Law in the News question? I am kicking myself so hard. I CLAMmed it, since I had no idea, but just to be funny I put the word "clam" in a random real state name...and it turns out that's the damn answer. If I'd only just guessed it as a real guess! But I didn't know, and wouldn't have buzzed in if it were a real J! game.
If I'd only just guessed it as a real guess! But I didn't know, and wouldn't have buzzed in if it were a real J! game.