DDP 2018 Town Hall

[Spade_Cooley 9,540]

So in a mere five months and a few days, the sign on the DDP head office will change. Consider this thread an open platform for any suggestions, questions or long-running issues you have with the DDP, the scoring, the website itself or just go "STOP CANCER MUMS" repeatedly.

[Spade_Cooley 9,540]

My intentions are to keep the game identical to its current format, except I will consider removing death notices from The Times/Telegraph as a legitimate QO source as they are effectively a paid-for comments section. But do share your concerns here.

[msc 18,480]

Do what you wish and ignore all the whining sods, I say.

 

That said, feel free to bring back the Scottish newspapers as QOs...

 

 

[msc 18,480]

Have the Times/Telegraph death notices produced QO for hits that otherwise would have missed out on them?

[Joey Russ 7,229]

12 minutes ago, msc said:

Have the Times/Telegraph death notices produced QO for hits that otherwise would have missed out on them?

I think they do. Michael Perham, for example, got a telegraph obit, and that's all from qualifying sources (as while he did get a BBC obituary, it wasn't one from a qualifying source). 

I think if you do remove the times/telegraph as obit sources Spade, I think you should probably bring an obit source into the competition, such as allowing local BBC obituaries again or bringing something like The New York Times into play. Though in the end, it is your rules, so I can't complain whatever you decide to do...

[YoungWillz 21,067]

As I recall, Kathleen Fryer and Douglas Reeman got pretty swift death notices, but eventually got a full Telegraph and Times Obituary respectively in due course.

 

Perham got a full Telegraph obit. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2017/04/19/right-reverend-michael-perham-bishop-gloucester-obituary/

[Spade_Cooley 9,540]

No, it's not the Times/Telegraph per se. It's the Times/Telegraph death notices: http://announcements.telegraph.co.uk/

Currently, these are acceptable obits. I'm not sure they should be.

 

Leonard Rosoman was allowed as a scoring pick back in 2012 based on just a Times death notice (admittedly he then scored obits in the Guardian, Times, Indie and Telegraph in the following month, so he wasn't exactly obscure).

[Spade_Cooley 9,540]

13 minutes ago, msc said:

Do what you wish and ignore all the whining sods, I say.

 

That said, feel free to bring back the Scottish newspapers as QOs...

 

 

 

Weirdly enough, the only time a Scottish source would have made a theoretical difference for me was when I had Sinan Samil Sam, the Turkish boxer, as a potential captain for 2016. He instead died in 2015, and bizarrely only received a UK obituary in the Herald.

[YoungWillz 21,067]

On death notices, it really is going to affect deaths toward the end of the year of some of the more esoteric picks. While they may gain a death notice, the obituary may follow some days later over the festive. As there is a pretty sharp cut off for the DDP and light of this change, I'd suggest extending the period for winding up the DDP by about a week.

[msc 18,480]

Was in the middle of replying to Joey about that, but type too slow. Hah. Thanks for the clarification.

 

 

I do agree with the local BBC/ITV pages of Joey's, however. The current system makes it easier to get hits from US sports people than it does from most Scottish celebs. The previous obit rules re BBC worked fine for nearly 20 years before folk on here complained (no offence intended).

 

As for the Scottish papers, they've knocked a bunch of politicos and non-Old Firm sports people from shortlist with their passing, from vague memory.

[Spade_Cooley 9,540]

3 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

On death notices, it really is going to affect deaths toward the end of the year of some of the more esoteric picks. While they may gain a death notice, the obituary may follow some days later over the festive. As there is a pretty sharp cut off for the DDP and light of this change, I'd suggest extending the period for winding up the DDP by about a week.

 

Yeah this is my thinking as well. On the other hand, maybe it's a bit of a fillip to the casual player that the real deep research picks effectively only have 51 weeks in the year to score. Want that former housemaster at Trinity College to give you the win? You got until December 11th to do it before the Times obit desk goes home for Christmas.

[Joey Russ 7,229]

Just a thought that came into my, maybe you could seperate the main competition into, well kind of, two separate brackets: a rookie's bracket and a veteran bracket. Since rookies are unlikely to win (especially with the improved research nowadays), I think it might be a good idea to give potential bragging rights to the rookies who are playing for the first time. Of course, if they win the whole thing, that'll be double bragging rights for them.

[Spade_Cooley 9,540]

I think an informal "Rookie of the Year" gong has always existed. Maybe it could be recognised in Facts and Figures as well, idk.

 

Maybe also a prize for the highest-scoring team who have at least 15 people more than 50% of the British population have heard of.

[YoungWillz 21,067]

4 minutes ago, Spade_Cooley said:

 

Yeah this is my thinking as well. On the other hand, maybe it's a bit of a fillip to the casual player that the real deep research picks effectively only have 51 weeks in the year to score. Want that former housemaster at Trinity College to give you the win? You got until December 11th to do it before the Times obit desk goes home for Christmas.

Bit unfair, ha ha!

 

I'll put forward Diane Torr as an example. There seemed to be some debate for days about whether the death occurred on the 31st or the 1st. On the website it was the 31st.  Once a formal obit was forthcoming, that was confirmed.

 

So if say Clive James dies overnight on New Year's Eve, you may have blood letting on your hands!

[themaninblack 2,112]

17 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

 

So if say Clive James dies overnight on New Year's Eve, you may have blood letting on your hands!

That would be the most appropriate DDP death of all time....

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

If we ban cancer moms then we'll have to deal with cancer dads or worse a cancer family.

[Joey Russ 7,229]

6 minutes ago, The Mad Hatter said:

If we ban cancer moms then we'll have to deal with cancer dads or worse a cancer family.

Nah, they'll all be gone. Cancer mum is used just a lot because they're the most common type of the OFFBIAD club. 

[Death Impends 8,003]

50 minutes ago, msc said:

I do agree with the local BBC/ITV pages of Joey's, however. The current system makes it easier to get hits from US sports people than it does from most Scottish celebs. The previous obit rules re BBC worked fine for nearly 20 years before folk on here complained (no offence intended).

I think at the very least the countrywide BBC regionals merit returning, as in the sections for England/Scotland/Northern Ireland/Wales at large, (though not sure if much a difference would be made with them back?) though I'm more on the fence regarding the very local pages.

 

And I agree regarding a potential drop of Telegraph/Times death announcements. From what I can tell, most cases who have some inherent notability later get a full fledged obit within a few months. (though that does bring up the timing issue mentioned above)

[Deathray 2,941]

Bring back regional BBC Obits. If the sports pages are fair game then they should be too.

[Johni 5]

This is very nice and decent post ..... You rocked posting it .... Thanks a lot for posting it ....!!!!

[Joey Russ 7,229]

Just now, Johni said:

This is very nice and decent post ..... You rocked posting it .... Thanks a lot for posting it ....!!!!

Fuck off!! 

[Sean 6,337]

I am kind of in two minds about changing the rules.I think it would be better without Shameless type picks but I think marginally famous picks make it more interesting.Also the will they wont they obit type picks are part of the fun.

[gcreptile 10,979]

What about a rule permitting each team to pick a maximum of three famous-for-being-ill types?

[Toast 16,155]

1 hour ago, Shaun of the Dead said:

I am kind of in two minds about changing the rules.I think it would be better without Shameless type picks but I think marginally famous picks make it more interesting.Also the will they wont they obit type picks are part of the fun.

 

There are more than enough "marginally famous" people without resorting to the cancer mums etc used by Phil Space in the tabloids.

[Deathray 2,941]

Only allow points if they get on BBC news at ten