Poorly Run Event Stories

[Tailsfan101]

Years in Division B: 1
Years in Division C: 3
College I'll be attending: Penn State University Park
Major, School and/or program (if known): Aerospace Engineering
Also accepted to: Virginia Tech, University of Pittsburgh
Wait listed at: Boring with applications
Rejected by: none

wrong forum

Wait, was s/he supposed to put this in Question Marathons?

[pb5754]

Years in Division B: 1
Years in Division C: 3
College I'll be attending: Penn State University Park
Major, School and/or program (if known): Aerospace Engineering
Also accepted to: Virginia Tech, University of Pittsburgh
Wait listed at: Boring with applications
Rejected by: none

wrong forum

Wait, was s/he supposed to put this in Question Marathons?

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4536

[Tailsfan101]

wrong forum

Wait, was s/he supposed to put this in Question Marathons?

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4536

It was a joke; I just thought that a forum and a thread are different things.

[pb5754]

Wait, was s/he supposed to put this in Question Marathons?

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4536

It was a joke; I just thought that a forum and a thread are different things.

[EightBitKiwi]

redacted because I guess it's not a poorly run event per se

[PM2017]

Last year's Anatomy invitational had a tongue diagram copied straight off the internet with the labels whited out. How did we know this? It just so happened that our anatomy sheet had the same exact diagram, only with all the labels still on there. We ended up getting fifth place.
I mean, it's invitationals, so that's acceptable and all so at least it didn't count, but it was still hilarious at the time.

I think I've seen this in some Astro tests. I wouldn't have said there's anything wrong with it...

[Uber]

Last year's Anatomy invitational had a tongue diagram copied straight off the internet with the labels whited out. How did we know this? It just so happened that our anatomy sheet had the same exact diagram, only with all the labels still on there. We ended up getting fifth place.
I mean, it's invitationals, so that's acceptable and all so at least it didn't count, but it was still hilarious at the time.

This is typical. The proctors aren't going to draw their own diagrams, cause it would end up being extremely low quality and a waste of time.

[farmerjoe279]

Thankfully, I have no poorly run event stories!

[dxu46]

Thankfully, I have no poorly run event stories!

Last year regionals rocks and minerals?

Regionals today, only one complaint, and it is a biggie.

Remember that post I made a few pages back?

At our regional competition, Rocks and Minerals (a timed station event) had stations that weren't timed. There were 50 minutes for 10+ stations, so we finished 20 minutes early and left. Also, there was an error in the test. It listed "hornblende" as a metamorphic rock, when in reality it is a mineral. We asked the ES, and she said it should have been "hornfels," a metamorphic rock ( ). So that question was exempted for all participants.

All that was true above was true today. Even the error. Yes. The test was the same as last year.
Overall, 0.5/10 because the one saving grace (can I call it that?) was that the specimens were okay. My partner and I wasted time by making Conglomerate and Breccia shout insults at each other and fighting .

A message to all event supervisors: Don't procrastinate making the tests.

[Galahad]

Dodgen 2018!

Disease Detectives - Overall, it was a fairly easy test with a majority being multiple choice or short answer (with very apparent answers), almost too easy. Both of our teams got near perfects (despite one team only having one person on it). It was literally two pages with one answer sheet page.
Another problem was that it was based over diseases that weren't related to this years topic! (Foodborne diseases) I mean, with a national-like test and a reputation like that you'd expect way better right? Half the questions weren't even on this years topic!
Finally, the answer sheet was horribly formatted! It was missing half of the numbers and we had to write in the numbers and answer slots. The slots that were there were either way too big or too small (ex 5 cm line for multiple choice, 2 cm line for a paragraph). or had too many or too little slots (5 slots when its a 6 slot answer)

Meteorology -
Section 1: Pure cancer. The test had a good 20 multiple choice (which is fine, I guess), but then it had 2 pages of straight true/false. This meant that you could do decent on the test literally by guessing! (In fact, one of our "bs" teams [had two people who don't study] beat a team that actually studies pretty hard) I mean, theres not too much wrong with that, but considering the fact that the test seemed like it was loosely based off of 80% Everyday Weather, 10% Severe Storms, and 10% Climate, it just didn't settle well. (THERE WERE LITERALLY NO OPEN ENDED ANSWERS, ALL MULTIPLE CHOICE OR T/F)

Section 2: What the ****. Half the test relied on section 2, which was a climate calculation. However, the question was written very poorly with differentiating and conflicting points. The numbers didn't add up, and to build to that they even gave us the wrong formula! Then they made it more confusing by using the wrong formula in their "example" in which they did a part of the calculation for us. It was very unclear what they wanted us to do and when we saw the answers, it looked like something even a AP Calc student would get a headache over.


Overall:
1) KNOW YOUR EVENT! READ THE RULES!
2) Include a variety of questions and make it so that the team deserving ends up on top (in depth questions and not all T/F or multiple)
3) MAKE SURE YOUR FORMATTING IS RIGHT!

(and yes, I'm from Hawaii [Highlands Inter], doing the Dodgen [from Georgia] invitational.)