The 2013 Off Topic Celebrity Dead Pool

[Tuberski]

You're a celebrity stalker?

ACK!

[DaShi]

Suspected celebrity stalker, if you don't mind.

[SlowwHand]

[embalmer42]

Thanks Wezil for being the front man on this for another year, doing the dirty work for the rest of us.

[Wezil]

Thanks everyone. I appreciate the nice comments.


In going through the lists this year I came up with a couple areas of "celebrity" concerns that I wanted to talk about with the players. Although I didn't disqualify any picks this year (except the dead celebs a couple of you tried to sneak by me) I do want to avoid any hassles down the road.

"terrorists" I banned this year. While I can appreciate the counter-arguments I simply didn't want to be in a position where someone submits a Top 20 Al Qaeda list as a team. Verifying would be almost impossible.

Other potential problems on the horizon -

Rich people - Can you be famous for being rich (I'm thinking 2nd+ generations from the wealth creator, who would probably be famous in their own right)? I understand rich people engage in philanthropy and this is how we know their names but I am having some difficulty with wealth equalling celebrity.

Reality TV "stars" - Like porn stars they are becoming a dime a dozen. Unless the reality contestant had a measure of fame before the reality TV show I am leaning toward banning them.

Lastly, an issue brought up by a former player in a personal conversation over the holidays.... YouTube "celebrities". Some of you may have heard of "The bus lady" after the video of her being taunted went viral and I submit her as an example of what I am talking about. The mere fact we can talk about her indicates she has reached some measure of "celebrity" but should she qualify?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l93wAqnPQwk

(almost 9 million views)


Thoughts?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Just another query- seeing as Michael Winner has revealed investigating assisted suicide at the Dignitas clinic, what sort of scoring might apply to such cases? Suicide would normally be "unnatural" but this might be a grey area.

[Ming]

Thanks everyone. I appreciate the nice comments.

You deserve all the comments... it's a lot of work doing this, and I for one REALLY APPRECIATE IT!

Now, on to the discussion

"terrorists" I banned this year. While I can appreciate the counter-arguments I simply didn't want to be in a position where someone submits a Top 20 Al Qaeda list as a team. Verifying would be almost impossible.

Mixed feelings on this... but your point of submitting a top 10 Al Qaeda list puts me in the camp that you did the right thing.

Rich people - Can you be famous for being rich (I'm thinking 2nd+ generations from the wealth creator, who would probably be famous in their own right)? I understand rich people engage in philanthropy and this is how we know their names but I am having some difficulty with wealth equalling celebrity.

It all depends on your definition of celebrity... and frankly, it really depends on the individual. There are a lot of 2nd generation (and even some 1st generation) rich people that I wouldn't consider celebrities... but it really comes down to the definition of celebrity. The classic simple definition is "a famous person - fame or notoriety" Rich people who are in the news for whatever reason meet that definition. Frankly, there are a lot of people on some of the lists that are truly considered celebrities, and I had no clue who they were.

Reality TV "stars" - Like porn stars they are becoming a dime a dozen. Unless the reality contestant had a measure of fame before the reality TV show I am leaning toward banning them.

Again... these people are in the news, TV, the web... all over the place. they are indeed celebrities. Your argument about them having a measure of fame before is kind of silly in my opinion. That's like saying we can't pick sports figures or musicians unless they had a measure of fame before their career.

Lastly, an issue brought up by a former player in a personal conversation over the holidays.... YouTube "celebrities". Some of you may have heard of "The bus lady" after the video of her being taunted went viral and I submit her as an example of what I am talking about. The mere fact we can talk about her indicates she has reached some measure of "celebrity" but should she qualify?

The mere fact that we do talk about them... watch them... start threads about them... means they are indeed celebrities. Granted, we might consider them not as "important" as some Movie star, but they qualify under the most basic of definitions.

Is a World leader more important than a boy band singer? In the end, they are all celebrities.

Also, with the exceptions of terrorists (and world leaders who should be shot), they are all just as likely to die or not. So does it really matter.

Now granted, YOUR GAME - YOUR RULES And I will play with whatever you rules you want. You do all the work, and the rules are what they are.
But as far as what's a celebrity, it's really all about being famous for "something"... and I really don't have a problem with what that something is.

[Krill]

I would prefer to ban all of those Wezil, but I don't care that much.

[Guynemer]

Whereas I would prefer to ban none of those, Wezil, and I don't care at all.

[Robert]

I think that the terrorists idea is a clever one, but feel like all other categories will sort themselves out by the rule that a mainstream media channel must report their deaths.

But even if we think about the Al Qaida 20 list, how many of Al Qaida's top 20 did die last year?
Perhaps not even more then 2 or 3. Nice, but not going to make everybody win.

The only sure death is the #1 Hamas guy. I don't even know why I didn't include him.
Israel always can be counted on for this sure score.

edit: and of course: your game, your rules. I'm fine with anything you decide.

[-Jrabbit]

I see no reason to exclude reality TV stars. The whole point of going on those shows is to "get famous." It may be tawdry and require no talent, but such is our world. And much as it pains me to admit it, the same is true of Internet "stars." Basically, the market has spoken.

Ruling terrorists ineligible sounds good in theory but strikes me as a bit of a slippery slope. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. And/or politician. But if you're comfortable making those rulings, I trust you to do so.

[Hauldren Collider]

We can define terrorist as "being a member of an EU- or US-designated terrorist group".

[SlowwHand]

What is a Kardashian?

[Wezil]

Just another query- seeing as Michael Winner has revealed investigating assisted suicide at the Dignitas clinic, what sort of scoring might apply to such cases? Suicide would normally be "unnatural" but this might be a grey area.

Interesting.

Suicide of course doesn't make one ineligible but knowing of an impending (scheduled) death does sort of take the challenge out of the game. Kind of like death row inmates....

[Wezil]

What is a Kardashian?

Answer - Last year's headache for Wezil when determining eligibility...