"Ball Control" - November 26, 2021

[BethA]

I’m always amazed how often the meta answer seems to crop up in other places during the active contest period! It seems to appear frequently in other popular (NYT, LAT) crossword grids or clues, sometimes the news, and I’ve heard mention of spoilers appearing in ads on the same print or web page as the WSJ meta puzzle! This time, if you watched some of the National Dog Show , you’d have heard HANDLER dozens of times!!!

I know that it means nothing if you haven’t gotten the answer, but I always want to shush them!

[Kas]

Kas 4. [Shakes fist, yells at dog, sulks for rest of week.]

[Glorfindel]

Even when I get an answer that looks obviously right, like HANDLER here, I find reason to doubt myself. To me, a "ball handler" is a basketball player, so the solution seemed incongruous in a football-themed puzzle. Fortunately I didn't see the alternate answers others have described and so submitted the only one I found.

For a similar reason, I had to look up the name of the dude who spots the ball for the placekicker since I couldn't think of any other position player who fit the 'handler' moniker... but it appears that player is prosaically named a 'holder', so no dice. In the end, the answer was compelling enough to inspire confidence in its correctness.

[Limerick Savant]

Happy Thanksgiving to all you nice Muggles.

Solved and ashore as of early yesterday morning but I just realized that everything else I have to say this week is at least a very big nudge and potentially a

?
It’s been a challenging year but there is much to be thankful for including the nudges and coaching I have received here that have allowed me to tackle the meta more often than not. I may not be first down at the beach this week but then I wasn’t rushing to pass anyone on the way. All I can do is go forth, and long for the day that the trophy mug will be mine. When I reach that goal, post, I will, my mug shot sans face mask. For now I will just punt with this limerick.

Knowing the score
(Hint: It’s 7 points)

Once you iron out the grid, this week’s version
Will become a most welcome excursion
And you’ll find that the trick
To avoiding the kick
Is to make the suggested conversion

BTW, Go Bearcats!

I didn't see anything brushing up against a spoiler, above. Someone argued that "conversion" in the post suggested "Fourth Down," but a conversion involves getting a first down, or 'conversion' to a first down, where "to a first down" is implied. Although rarely said, first, second, and third downs are 'converted' to first downs. "Fourth down conversions (to first downs)" are rare, since a vast majority of fourth downs involve punting or attempting field goals rather than attempting to convert to first downs or touchdowns. "Third down conversion rates" are sometimes dicussed as measures of success for teams' offenses.

Apologies for the sportsing details, but this post was reported & its author also felt it might have contained a spoiler.

Joe, I have a question for the ref so I can avoid a future penalty:
I had assumed that using the ? tag to conceal any questionable hints was sufficient notice to click only if you were an eligible receiver (I.e. claiming a spot onshore) or at least desperate to score after the 2 minute warning. Muggles appear to rely on the rules of good sportspersonship. Since a flag was thrown on my attempt, I am now confused. What is the tag for?

[Joe Ross]

Happy Thanksgiving to all you nice Muggles.

BTW, Go Bearcats!

I didn't see anything brushing up against a spoiler, above. Someone argued that "conversion" in the post suggested "Fourth Down," but a conversion involves getting a first down, or 'conversion' to a first down, where "to a first down" is implied. Although rarely said, first, second, and third downs are 'converted' to first downs. "Fourth down conversions (to first downs)" are rare, since a vast majority of fourth downs involve punting or attempting field goals rather than attempting to convert to first downs or touchdowns. "Third down conversion rates" are sometimes dicussed as measures of success for teams' offenses.

Apologies for the sportsing details, but this post was reported & its author also felt it might have contained a spoiler.

Joe, I have a question for the ref so I can avoid a future penalty:
I had assumed that using the ? tag to conceal any questionable hints was sufficient notice to click only if you were an eligible receiver (I.e. claiming a spot onshore) or at least desperate to score after the 2 minute warning. Muggles appear to rely on the rules of good sportspersonship. Since a flag was thrown on my attempt, I am now confused. What is the tag for?

First, my apology for not recognizing a fellow Bearcat fan, or your good wishes, at the least!

LET'S GET ALL MUGGLES' PERSPECTIVES ON THIS, PLEASE.

My understanding of using Made you look! tags in these forums:

• Did I get you, again? tagged, or not, true spoilers should not be posted before deadlines, apart from creators giving hints.

• After deadlines, Seriously?!? Again? tags can be used when there might be a question of whether others are still working on solving.

• Some posted puzzles don't have deadlines and This one is 100% on YOU! tags might be appropriate.

[hoover]

I'm a Johnny-come-lately, but my perception is that the spoiler tag rules should be more strict in the WSJ forum than in the "Other Meta Puzzles" forums.

Or maybe it feels that way because the WSJ puzzle is an official contest conducted by an external entity and only brought here by muggles, vs. the puzzles for less-formal contests that the author muggles post here themselves.

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[Joe Ross]

I'm a Johnny-come-lately, but my perception is that the spoiler tag rules should be more strict in the WSJ forum than in the "Other Meta Puzzles" forums.

Or maybe it feels that way because the WSJ puzzle is an official contest conducted by an external entity and only brought here by muggles, vs. the puzzles for less-formal contests that the author muggles post here themselves.

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Add MGWCC, MMMM, and the like.

[Wendy Walker]

My two cents: If you DO in fact look underneath a WSJ spoiler tag and it DOES help you get the meta, you are fully justified in declaring that you are on shore BUT you should state that you needed a nudge (for the sake of transparency). Whether you submit to the WSJ after receiving a nudge is up to your conscience -- there are good, ethical people on all sides of that dilemma. But there is no debate for the MGWCC: If you receive any kind of a nudge whatsoever, you MUST indicate that it was a group solve.

[BarbaraK]

What about comments on non-meta grid entries? I’d spoiler tag those for purists but since there’s an unlocked .puz file available don’t see them as really spoilery

[CPJohnson]

I agree with posts 305 (Joe), 306 (hoover), and 308 (Wendy Walker).

[LadyBird]

LET'S GET ALL MUGGLES' PERSPECTIVES ON THIS, PLEASE.

My understanding of using Made you look! tags in these forums:

• Did I get you, again? tagged, or not, true spoilers should not be posted before deadlines, apart from creators giving hints.

I'm a Johnny-come-lately, but my perception is that the spoiler tag rules should be more strict in the WSJ forum than in the "Other Meta Puzzles" forums.

Or maybe it feels that way because the WSJ puzzle is an official contest conducted by an external entity and only brought here by muggles, vs. the puzzles for less-formal contests that the author muggles post here themselves.

Yes to these two points. I don't think that we should be posting nudges under the spoiler tag before the deadline. We already have periodic--and civil (yeah)-- discussions about the use of nudges obtained through a PM with another Muggle. Having these nudges posted in the forum--even under a spoiler tag--would be this situation on steroids. And I fear that it could lead to a bit of rancor in the ranks. And how do you define a "questionable hint" versus a full on shove to shore?

[hoover]

Sometimes people post things that they don't think of as spoilers but actually are, such as with N.K. JEMISIN, where multiple "never heard of this author" posts may have alerted those LAS that the answer was not H.G. WELLS.

[sanmilton]

In September*, a Panama oiler
Had a bit of a bang in its boiler.
Conflagration ensued,
Thus igniting much crude,
And for what happened next, see this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MT_New_Diamond.
___________
* 2020

[ZooAnimalsOnWheels]

I would worry about usability of the message board if spoiler tags on meta solutions were allowed. We're all eager to discuss the meta as soon as we solve it, and I could see a few brief comments with spoiler tags being replied to with more extensive comments with spoiler tags, and then cascading to a point where a good portion of the board on Sunday was just a wall of spoiler tags while others are still trying to solve.

You would also have Sunday solvers replying to spoiler-tagged comments from Friday solvers six pages back and the board loses its conversational flow.
I'm fairly new here, but I like the community aspect where everyone can chime in with their rabbit holes and a-ha moments late Sunday night and Monday morning as one group.

[Wendy Walker]

I would worry about usability of the message board if spoiler tags on meta solutions were allowed. We're all eager to discuss the meta as soon as we solve it, and I could see a few brief comments with spoiler tags being replied to with more extensive comments with spoiler tags, and then cascading to a point where a good portion of the board on Sunday was just a wall of spoiler tags while others are still trying to solve.

You would also have Sunday solvers replying to spoiler-tagged comments from Friday solvers six pages back and the board loses its conversational flow.
I'm fairly new here, but I like the community aspect where everyone can chime in with their rabbit holes and a-ha moments late Sunday night and Monday morning as one group.

That is an excellent point, Z.A.o.W.!

[Limerick Savant]

Thank you. The discussion was helpful for me. It seems that there is a pretty clear consensus among veteran Muggles that a warning is not sufficient with a meta contest puzzle and generally discouraged. Though I tend to favor an honor system even to the point of foregoing internet searches at the level of grid solving, I understand the reasoning presented and the desire for equity when a contest is involved. On the other hand, as has been pointed out, what seems like innocent discussion can sometimes be a nudge away from a rabbit hole. More than once, I think I have benefited from discussion here that helped me get a different perspective on the solution. Bottom line: With regard to spoilers/nudges, unlike Potter Stewart, I don’t always know it when I see it.

My opinion is we should avoid the tag with the possible exception of when we are about to launch into a shameless pun rant.

[sharkicicles]

My 2c- I would prefer spoiler tags only be used after the deadline for any outside contest and only by the creators for MMM/MOAT/MEOW etc.

Also my 2c- the Bears are a terrible football team.

[Joe Ross]

Spoiler tags are a standard feature of phpBB coding, which is used for "bulletin board" forums. They are generic for all types of discussions which might include spoilers, such as books, movies, etc.

It might seem they were custom-made by & for this site to discuss contest crosswords. They weren't.

Thanks to all for adding your thoughts. Keep posting them, please.

[otlaolap]

My own, not carefully researched (i.e. not researched at all), feeling is that the use of spoiler tags here is relatively recent, at least in the number we have seen recently. My opinion is that the forum is better without spoilers, even when tagged, until midnight Sunday EST, and thereafter they are not needed. When browsing here before that time I have either submitted an answer (might not be right but is the best I will come up with) or I am just taking time off from fail-to-solve-so-far and looking for general camaraderie or a general feeling about the puzzle ('hopeless", "simplest ever", "Hail Mary time") in order to set my expectations and reset my enthusiasm for continued labor. The spoilers feel (to me) like roadbumps in this path of gentle relaxation. The details of the puzzle -- its internal clues and avalanches of rabbits -- is much more enjoyable on Monday.

Anyone know what happened to the ratings? Helps me to stay humble to see my successes matching nicely with 1 and 2 and my failures aligning so well with 4 and 5.

[boharr]

^^Well said.