TSL

[fleet130]

if there were a clear official policy

Policies are easy, it's clarity and implementation that can be elusive. (e.g.The Government)

The rules are intended to be a clear policy, but sometimes the rule-writers fail to foresee all possible interpretations. Since they have a clear idea in their minds of what the want to say, they tend to interpret what they write as what they mean, even though it may not be clear to others (see what I mean?).

It's sometimes a matter of timing. Since the national tournament is after other tournaments, Regional/State event supervisor's responses sometimes conflict with a later national answer. After an opinion has been published, it's difficult to reverse the decision. Some teams won't get the word about the change, making them very unhappy campers when they find out during their tournament.

What's the point of a national clarification if it just applies to nationals

The National Tournament! Some Regional/State/Invitational event supervisors aren't even aware of National FAQs/Clarifications. Others are unable to comply with them for a one reason or another. It's impossible to ensure they will honor national decisions.

I really don't think there's a need to list points

I don't think so either, but at one time they were required. There may be event supervisors that interpret the current rules to require them also (see my previous post).

It's not all that easy to get in touch with your local event supervisor.

It's even harder for the national organization. They have no idea who they are or how to contact them. Everything is done through state directors.

Perhaps that issue could be addressed in future.

See the last paragraph of my previous post.


Overall, conditions have improved significantly in this respect through the years, mostly due to the magic of the internet.

[Flavorflav]

if there were a clear official policy

Policies are easy, it's clarity and implementation that can be elusive.

This is an easy fix, though - in 6.b after "format specified" either add "in rule 4.a" or add "in the sample TSL on soinc."

[fleet130]

This is an easy fix,

I agree your suggestion would help, but unfortunately paragraph 4.a doesn't define the format, only a general description of the how the tasks are to be identified. In my mind, that's is where the lack of clarity stems from. The paragraph should clearly identify what information is required and how it is to be presented (e.g. TSL must be in table format and contain the following information; Task Description, Letter, Number, and a blank cell for event supervisors to enter points earned for the task.)

That the intent is unclear in the current rules supports the premise: "Policies are easy, it's clarity and implementation that can be elusive."I was addressing where the lack of clarity stems from. Once an unclear statement is published, it can take many people and hours of discussion (even for such a simple solution as you propose) to agree on a fix. Adding more language (my suggestion) often leads to more questions than it solves.

[Flavorflav]

This is an easy fix,

I agree your suggestion would help, but unfortunately paragraph 4.a doesn't define the format, only a general description of the how the tasks are to be identified. In my mind, that's is where the lack of clarity stems from. The paragraph should clearly identify what information is required and how it is to be presented (e.g. TSL must be in table format and contain the following information; Task Description, Letter, Number, and a blank cell for event supervisors to enter points earned for the task.)

That the intent is unclear in the current rules supports the premise: "Policies are easy, it's clarity and implementation that can be elusive."I was addressing where the lack of clarity stems from. Once an unclear statement is published, it can take many people and hours of discussion (even for such a simple solution as you propose) to agree on a fix. Adding more language (my suggestion) often leads to more questions than it solves.

I like your proposed addition to 4.a quite a bit - it makes my addition unnecessary, since there would then be a format defined in the rules and no justification for considering the sample binding. I do not think that your text would raise more questions than it solves, though, because in this case there is a clear gap in the rules (a "specified format" which is not specified). Is that what you would like to see, yourself? A table with a blank for points?

I might add that the reason that I am pursuing this is that I have already requested clarification from the tournament organizers, but I am not sanguine about the likelihood of receiving an answer. I realize that all of this is nonbinding, but if we do not get an answer then it is all we will have to go on.

[fleet130]

My example was only an example. It needs a lot of thought by many people to discover any loopholes/inconsistencies. Since there is sometimes a need to conserve "real estate" in the rulebooks, additional clarification could also be included with the sample on the website.

[Primate]

Rules clarification from the national site regarding point values on TSLs:

You are not required to put point values down, but there is no penalty for
doing so.

The original question is included for your records; there is no need to
respond unless you feel there is an error.
=========================================================
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Rule 4a only states that Task Sequence Lists must include the number and
letter for each task. Do TSLs also have to include point values for each
task, since the sample TSL on this website includes point values?

Mission Possible

(section: 4 / paragraph: a / sub-paragraph: / line: 1)