NPS #5 - The Protest
So we should talk about the protest.
Here are the facts, sans color commentary. THAT will follow:
At our second bout at Cantab we (Columbus - Writers’ Block) were slamming against Puro Slam, Hawaii and Jersey City Slam. In the final rotation JCS put up a group piece - a duet - consisting of two poets who had already done individual poems in the bout. This is a breach of the group piece rules. While the Bout Manager noted the breach, she did not want to lodge punishment on site solely on the basis of observation (especially since the bout box’s rulebook had disappeared). So the Assistant Tournament Director was called to come over and weigh in. When he arrived he was appraised of the situation and was also sure a rule had been broken but again, did not rule on site. I was asked as a competing team to lodge a protest. I did so grudgingly, having never filed a protest before, and then spent the next three-and-a-half hours in a hotel lobby waiting on the result of a Protest Committee decision. Eventually the Protest Committee ruled that a rule had been broken and the 1 that was awarded to JCS at the end of the bout turned into a 4, making the Writer’s Block and Puro Slam teams tied for first. No team in the bout save JCS had a shot at semis before the protest result and no team had a shot after the protest result.
Those are the facts, and they are as clean of opinion and interpretation as I can make them.
That said, some thoughts (which will be completely opinionated and interpreted as I see fit):
Jersey City Slam is a new, passionate, energetic bunch of friendly, open poets. They clearly love poetry, Slam and the community vibe that comes with those things. They are the kind of people the Slam community wants and needs. At least one member of their crew is a member of the Fellowship Committee so not only do they support Slam and PSi from the microphone; they would appear to understand the importance of stewardship as well. I liked these guys before we bouted and we had spoken off and on in various places in and around the hotel very endearingly. I liked this squad.
All this said, they broke a rule, and a pretty obvious one. While you can attempt to read into the language of the rule in a variety of ways, you cannot deny the practice of the rule over the last 15 years. This is roughly the same rule that the Nuyorican team broke in 1996 in SlamNation, Cleveland broke last year, and one other team broke THE NIGHT BEFORE the JCS/Columbus/Hawaiy/Puro bout. If you asked 75 teams if this was a rule breach 73 of them would have said yes. In fact, that’s exactly what happened last week.
I feel for Jersey City Slam. They’re a new team that had some strong poets and a shot at semis out the gate. I had an abysmal first year at Nats, so I can understand in some way what it’s like to feel like you were denied something great. My first night at Nats was in a bout before cheerleading had become truly frowned upon and was still very much a strategy of opposing teams. The difference between what happened to my team and what happened to JCS is that JCS was not, in fact, “done wrong”. JCS made an honest-to-God mistake and they were held accountable to that mistake. There wasn’t any malice in enforcing the rule; it’s a rule…it’s supposed to be enforced.
What I disliked about the whole situation (besides some peripheral bullshit) is that I was vaguely made out like the bad guy, like I stripped JCS of their win or I hated on them, like anyone who didn’t feel as bad for them as THEY felt (which is scientifically impossible, by the way) was an asshole…especially if they filed the protest that made the bad feelings come out. Worse, there was a brief initial impression that their team was being called something other than mistaken, like they were being called sneaky or something.
Somehow the person who witnessed the crime has become the bad guy and the person who did the crime - even accidentally - has been treated like the victim. The truth of the matter is that there is only one victim - JCS - and one perpetrator…also JCS.
And the language being used! “Stripped”. “Denied.” “Wronged.” “Fucked.” “Screwed.” These are words I have either seen or heard associated with how JCS was handled. Not a single one of these words is appropriate unless you just want to convince JCS that you empathize with them, which I also wouldn’t recommend. Almost all of these words imply a wrongdoing on someone else’s part working against JCS. That didn’t happen. And the remaining word - “stripped” - suggests that they earned something that they in fact did not. In fact, “stripped” is the most intriguing word to look at because beyond JCS, this has deeper implications about how we perceive protests in general. An example:
Today at work a man came up to me and said “Is the men's room really out of order?” I informed him that it was, and that the sign on the door stating as much was in fact real. He asked if the women’s restroom was an option. I told him it absolutely was not. He sighed and said something along the lines of, “That ain’t right” and walked off.
Dude, it’s not unfair…it’s broken.
JCS never earned the 1st place rank because they didn’t play the same game the other three teams played. Again. I’m not calling them cheaters. I’m saying they didn’t ever really do what they needed to do to get a legal first place rank. If we’re playing Monopoly and you get to roll two dice and I get to roll 1 die then we aren’t playing the same game. And if you beat me with a 2:1 dice ratio you can’t exactly say you won. Hell, I live in Columbus. What do you think Jim Tressel had to clean his desk out over? Why do you think Ohio State has to ignore the results of their entire 2010 football season? Because the games they “won” were won outside of the context of every other team they played and the league itself. That’s why it’s not as simple as OSU’s wins not counting. OSU’s record isn’t 0-16. It’s an X with an asterisk, as if it never happened. OSU isn’t being “stripped” of their wins…their wins were illegal. And so was JCS’s. You can't strip what you didn't have. The way we talk about these types of things needs to be carefully weighed because it implies things that weren't true, never happened or weren't intended.
And let’s be clear: my team was not the only team affected by the rule breach. There was a team on the bubble of semis - Columbus-Writing Wrongs - that wouldn’t have made it to semis if I hadn’t filed the protest…a team that went on to Finals, mind you. What would it have said about me if I had foregone the protest to make JCS feel better or to avoid a conflict with some nice guys, but knowingly denied a team that didn’t break the rules further stage time? I didn’t even know about Writing Wrongs being the next team in line for semis until I was sitting in the lobby waiting to speak to the Protest Committee (or maybe it was after I spoke with them…I can’t recall. I only got about five minutes with them and had to sit for three hours, so it’s a little hazy now). Not that it matters what team was on the bubble, mind you...SOME team was on the bubble no matter what. All I knew was that it wasn't mine.
(And anybody who thinks for a second that I might have filed the protest in Writing Wrongs interest is a doltish conspiracy theorist at best and a complete idiot in need of shock therapy at second best. You think I’m going to break a record of never having filed a protest out of city pride? Fuck you, son.)
But you know what? All of this would have been unnecessary if it had been handled differently after the bout and, arguably, better. Here is what SHOULD have happened, and I hope it’s considered by every team, Bout Manager and MC in the future:
- JCS did what they did in the final rotation and the breach was observed by the BM.
- The BM let the MC run the show as is, but informed any teams with concerns during the bout to wait until after the bout to resolve the potential rule breach.
(So far, this is exactly what happened at our bout.)
-- The BM approaches all teams after the bout and informs them of the rule breach and then…
(...and this is the big part...)
- If JCS disagreed with the ruling then JCS should have filed a protest against the BM.
See, if JCS doesn’t agree with the call by the BM then they’re using the protest process against the RULES, not team vs. team. It ceases to be personal because a Bout Manager or MC or Tournament Director has no personal stake one way or the other…they just enforce rules. Plus, no harm has been done from the stage because the bout was “resolved” publicly in their favor anyway. There’s no reason why a BM or an MC can’t charge a team and that team have to deal with the RULES, not another team who doesn’t even WANT to file a protest, but feels right is right, so does so because apparently no one else will. Or make ALL of the teams file the protest, not just one. I’m not a rules geek. I don’t walk around with the rulebook in my pocket. But hell: I don’t even use group pieces and even I knew that rule had been broken the second I saw it.
I’m not saying all protests should be handled this way or even half of them. But when the breach is clear and public the BM, MC, ATD or TD should be all over that, not compelling me to do it. You don’t need an aggrieved party in the room to make that case. JCS wasn’t hiding anything; they didn’t think they’d broken a rule, so they had their poets’ names and their order written down for all to see and process. BMs are referees. Let teams argue with them, not look foul at each other the rest of the week for simply pointing out the rules.
As to why it took three and half hours to rule on a protest that was ruled on the night before by the same group of people, I reserve commentary. Anything else would be rumor mongering. In the end, what’s done is done and I did what I was supposed to do to preserve the integrity of the bout and Slam. I suspect not everyone involved in this scenario behaved under that mantle, but whatever.
I wish Jersey City Slam the best at home and abroad, and definitely at the next NPS. I hope their poets have not been overly soured by the experience. And I hope that one day we’ll be able to shake hands again, because we didn’t the rest of the week. I want to go back to liking their poems unapologetically and them liking mine unapologetically. I love rookies and would never hurt a rookie intentionally or in my own interest “just because”. I think the future of PSi lies less in youth than it does in rookies who actually make it to our events. I want that future to be strong and hopeful, not bitter and pointing at the “bad” guys who fucked up their party.
I hope to never have to file another protest again. It isn’t a pleasant process for anyone. Going through that experience ruined the entire next day for me from sun-up to sundown, and I didn’t want to talk to people I love and see only once a year. That FEELS almost not worth filing a protest for but then, that’s not the Scott Motherfucking Woods way.
Here are the facts, sans color commentary. THAT will follow:
At our second bout at Cantab we (Columbus - Writers’ Block) were slamming against Puro Slam, Hawaii and Jersey City Slam. In the final rotation JCS put up a group piece - a duet - consisting of two poets who had already done individual poems in the bout. This is a breach of the group piece rules. While the Bout Manager noted the breach, she did not want to lodge punishment on site solely on the basis of observation (especially since the bout box’s rulebook had disappeared). So the Assistant Tournament Director was called to come over and weigh in. When he arrived he was appraised of the situation and was also sure a rule had been broken but again, did not rule on site. I was asked as a competing team to lodge a protest. I did so grudgingly, having never filed a protest before, and then spent the next three-and-a-half hours in a hotel lobby waiting on the result of a Protest Committee decision. Eventually the Protest Committee ruled that a rule had been broken and the 1 that was awarded to JCS at the end of the bout turned into a 4, making the Writer’s Block and Puro Slam teams tied for first. No team in the bout save JCS had a shot at semis before the protest result and no team had a shot after the protest result.
Those are the facts, and they are as clean of opinion and interpretation as I can make them.
That said, some thoughts (which will be completely opinionated and interpreted as I see fit):
Jersey City Slam is a new, passionate, energetic bunch of friendly, open poets. They clearly love poetry, Slam and the community vibe that comes with those things. They are the kind of people the Slam community wants and needs. At least one member of their crew is a member of the Fellowship Committee so not only do they support Slam and PSi from the microphone; they would appear to understand the importance of stewardship as well. I liked these guys before we bouted and we had spoken off and on in various places in and around the hotel very endearingly. I liked this squad.
All this said, they broke a rule, and a pretty obvious one. While you can attempt to read into the language of the rule in a variety of ways, you cannot deny the practice of the rule over the last 15 years. This is roughly the same rule that the Nuyorican team broke in 1996 in SlamNation, Cleveland broke last year, and one other team broke THE NIGHT BEFORE the JCS/Columbus/Hawaiy/Puro bout. If you asked 75 teams if this was a rule breach 73 of them would have said yes. In fact, that’s exactly what happened last week.
I feel for Jersey City Slam. They’re a new team that had some strong poets and a shot at semis out the gate. I had an abysmal first year at Nats, so I can understand in some way what it’s like to feel like you were denied something great. My first night at Nats was in a bout before cheerleading had become truly frowned upon and was still very much a strategy of opposing teams. The difference between what happened to my team and what happened to JCS is that JCS was not, in fact, “done wrong”. JCS made an honest-to-God mistake and they were held accountable to that mistake. There wasn’t any malice in enforcing the rule; it’s a rule…it’s supposed to be enforced.
What I disliked about the whole situation (besides some peripheral bullshit) is that I was vaguely made out like the bad guy, like I stripped JCS of their win or I hated on them, like anyone who didn’t feel as bad for them as THEY felt (which is scientifically impossible, by the way) was an asshole…especially if they filed the protest that made the bad feelings come out. Worse, there was a brief initial impression that their team was being called something other than mistaken, like they were being called sneaky or something.
Somehow the person who witnessed the crime has become the bad guy and the person who did the crime - even accidentally - has been treated like the victim. The truth of the matter is that there is only one victim - JCS - and one perpetrator…also JCS.
And the language being used! “Stripped”. “Denied.” “Wronged.” “Fucked.” “Screwed.” These are words I have either seen or heard associated with how JCS was handled. Not a single one of these words is appropriate unless you just want to convince JCS that you empathize with them, which I also wouldn’t recommend. Almost all of these words imply a wrongdoing on someone else’s part working against JCS. That didn’t happen. And the remaining word - “stripped” - suggests that they earned something that they in fact did not. In fact, “stripped” is the most intriguing word to look at because beyond JCS, this has deeper implications about how we perceive protests in general. An example:
Today at work a man came up to me and said “Is the men's room really out of order?” I informed him that it was, and that the sign on the door stating as much was in fact real. He asked if the women’s restroom was an option. I told him it absolutely was not. He sighed and said something along the lines of, “That ain’t right” and walked off.
Dude, it’s not unfair…it’s broken.
JCS never earned the 1st place rank because they didn’t play the same game the other three teams played. Again. I’m not calling them cheaters. I’m saying they didn’t ever really do what they needed to do to get a legal first place rank. If we’re playing Monopoly and you get to roll two dice and I get to roll 1 die then we aren’t playing the same game. And if you beat me with a 2:1 dice ratio you can’t exactly say you won. Hell, I live in Columbus. What do you think Jim Tressel had to clean his desk out over? Why do you think Ohio State has to ignore the results of their entire 2010 football season? Because the games they “won” were won outside of the context of every other team they played and the league itself. That’s why it’s not as simple as OSU’s wins not counting. OSU’s record isn’t 0-16. It’s an X with an asterisk, as if it never happened. OSU isn’t being “stripped” of their wins…their wins were illegal. And so was JCS’s. You can't strip what you didn't have. The way we talk about these types of things needs to be carefully weighed because it implies things that weren't true, never happened or weren't intended.
And let’s be clear: my team was not the only team affected by the rule breach. There was a team on the bubble of semis - Columbus-Writing Wrongs - that wouldn’t have made it to semis if I hadn’t filed the protest…a team that went on to Finals, mind you. What would it have said about me if I had foregone the protest to make JCS feel better or to avoid a conflict with some nice guys, but knowingly denied a team that didn’t break the rules further stage time? I didn’t even know about Writing Wrongs being the next team in line for semis until I was sitting in the lobby waiting to speak to the Protest Committee (or maybe it was after I spoke with them…I can’t recall. I only got about five minutes with them and had to sit for three hours, so it’s a little hazy now). Not that it matters what team was on the bubble, mind you...SOME team was on the bubble no matter what. All I knew was that it wasn't mine.
(And anybody who thinks for a second that I might have filed the protest in Writing Wrongs interest is a doltish conspiracy theorist at best and a complete idiot in need of shock therapy at second best. You think I’m going to break a record of never having filed a protest out of city pride? Fuck you, son.)
But you know what? All of this would have been unnecessary if it had been handled differently after the bout and, arguably, better. Here is what SHOULD have happened, and I hope it’s considered by every team, Bout Manager and MC in the future:
- JCS did what they did in the final rotation and the breach was observed by the BM.
- The BM let the MC run the show as is, but informed any teams with concerns during the bout to wait until after the bout to resolve the potential rule breach.
(So far, this is exactly what happened at our bout.)
-- The BM approaches all teams after the bout and informs them of the rule breach and then…
(...and this is the big part...)
- If JCS disagreed with the ruling then JCS should have filed a protest against the BM.
See, if JCS doesn’t agree with the call by the BM then they’re using the protest process against the RULES, not team vs. team. It ceases to be personal because a Bout Manager or MC or Tournament Director has no personal stake one way or the other…they just enforce rules. Plus, no harm has been done from the stage because the bout was “resolved” publicly in their favor anyway. There’s no reason why a BM or an MC can’t charge a team and that team have to deal with the RULES, not another team who doesn’t even WANT to file a protest, but feels right is right, so does so because apparently no one else will. Or make ALL of the teams file the protest, not just one. I’m not a rules geek. I don’t walk around with the rulebook in my pocket. But hell: I don’t even use group pieces and even I knew that rule had been broken the second I saw it.
I’m not saying all protests should be handled this way or even half of them. But when the breach is clear and public the BM, MC, ATD or TD should be all over that, not compelling me to do it. You don’t need an aggrieved party in the room to make that case. JCS wasn’t hiding anything; they didn’t think they’d broken a rule, so they had their poets’ names and their order written down for all to see and process. BMs are referees. Let teams argue with them, not look foul at each other the rest of the week for simply pointing out the rules.
As to why it took three and half hours to rule on a protest that was ruled on the night before by the same group of people, I reserve commentary. Anything else would be rumor mongering. In the end, what’s done is done and I did what I was supposed to do to preserve the integrity of the bout and Slam. I suspect not everyone involved in this scenario behaved under that mantle, but whatever.
I wish Jersey City Slam the best at home and abroad, and definitely at the next NPS. I hope their poets have not been overly soured by the experience. And I hope that one day we’ll be able to shake hands again, because we didn’t the rest of the week. I want to go back to liking their poems unapologetically and them liking mine unapologetically. I love rookies and would never hurt a rookie intentionally or in my own interest “just because”. I think the future of PSi lies less in youth than it does in rookies who actually make it to our events. I want that future to be strong and hopeful, not bitter and pointing at the “bad” guys who fucked up their party.
I hope to never have to file another protest again. It isn’t a pleasant process for anyone. Going through that experience ruined the entire next day for me from sun-up to sundown, and I didn’t want to talk to people I love and see only once a year. That FEELS almost not worth filing a protest for but then, that’s not the Scott Motherfucking Woods way.