View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 30, 2004, 05:07am
rainmaker rainmaker is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
Quote:
Originally posted by CLAY
The test here is an open book. However it is more of an english exam than a rules test. I just wish they would ask the question without trying to confuse you. It's hard enough to remember the right ruling let alone add to the confussion.
I always get a chuckle out of this characterization of the test.

It's generally written in the same language as the rules. How can anyone claim they understand the rules but cant understand the questions?

Granted, there are 1-2 questions that are poorly worded or those that are largely irrelavant to the game.
I would agree that the wordings of the questions are mostly okay, but I do think that people who don't understand them might still know the rules very well. In learning the rules, one can take time and spend energy discussing, describing different situations and studying various resources. In taking the test, however, one must hope to gosh one understands at first glance whatever situation they are trying to talk about. If you can't understand it very well (such as when your English is a work-in-progress), tough tea-bags. I think the Fed would accomplish better results if they'd fully describe a certain situation, and then ask several questions about that situation. It would take more paper, perhaps, but would unquestionably get more to the root of what a testee knows.
Reply With Quote