Today marks the final day of competition in the first round of TwitterFightClub 2012. We are one step closer to crowning this year’s champ. On Friday, we will see Round 2 action from all contestants still standing in the bottom two ‘regions’ of the brackets. The four lower left matches are:
(1) @abuaardvark v. (8) @drjjoyner
(12) @stcolumbia v. (4) @allthingsct
(11) @naheedmustafa v. (3) @adamserwer
(10) @stephaniecarvin v. (2) joshuafoust
Their panel of judges includes:
- @dianawueger
- @hilango
- @katiedemann
- @neilbhatiya
- @petulantskeptic
The bottom right region includes the following matchups:
(1) @dandrezner v. (9) @USEmbPretoria
(5) @InkSptsGulliver v. (4) @DaveedGR
(6) @evanchill v. (14) @astridhka
(7) @dianawueger v. (2) @blakehounshell
They will be facing the judgments of:
- @BareftStratgist
- @EricMartin24
- @mvallonesta
- @trdeghett
- @WThomasWebb
Now on to today’s business!
Day 4 Match-ups
Today’s expert judging panel includes:
The voting and judging for today will be on the upper right ‘region’ of the brackets, where @SlaughterAM is the one seed. Polls will be open until midnight, and full results will be posted in the morning, along with the first match-ups of Round 2.
Usual reminders: the panel’s judgment will count for 50% of the vote, with each judge representing one-fifth of that total. So don’t forget to vote: in a close match, as history has shown, the popular vote can overrule a split judging panel. Judges and voters alike are encouraged to look at metrics such as: knowledge base; quality of argumentation; innovative thinking; humor, snark, facility with quips, and charisma; and responsiveness to followers. Contestants’ full bodies of work on Twitter are fair game, but any work outside of Twitter should not be considered, and once again everyone is encouraged to make their decisions in their own way.
Day 3 Results
(1) @attackerman vs. (16) @elsnarkistani
Judges: 4-1 for @attackerman (@attackerman wins 80% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@attackerman: 140 (74%)
@elsnarkistani: 49 (26%)
Feisty 16 seed @elsnarkistani makes a respectable showing, but can’t compete with overall number one, powerhouse @attackerman.
(8) @FiveRupees vs. (9) @AdamWeinstein
Judges: 4-1 for @AdamWeinstein (@AdamWeinstein wins 80% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@FiveRupees 74 (39%)
@AdamWeinstein 118 (61%)
The ultra-engaged Mother Jones reporter advances handily over the widely respected doctoral candidate.
(5) @gregorydjohnsen vs. (12) @smsaideman
Judges: 4-1 for @smsaideman (80% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@gregorydjohnsen: 97 (54%)
@smsaideman: 84 (46%)
It’s another 12-5 upset for the competition - and the only match of the day where the judges’ results and the public polls didn’t agree - as the popular vote tilted toward phd student and Yemen expert @gregorydjohnsen wasn’t enough to overcome professor @smsaideman’s prolific campaigning which won over a majority of the judging panel and gave him the victory in this match.
(4) @glcarlstrom vs. (13) @GEsfandiari
Judges: 4-1 for @glcarlstrom (80% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@glcarlstrom: 102 (73%)
@GEsfandiari: 37 (27%)
Al Jazeera reporter @glcarlstrom takes the popular vote and the judges’ poll over RFE/RL journalist @GEsfandiari.
(6) @chrisalbon vs. (11) @speechboy71
Judges: 3-2 for @chrisalbon (60% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@chrisalbon: 135 (72%)
@speechboy71: 53 (28%)
These two engaged in a highly entertaining match all day, and @speechboy71 deployed a series of impressively cute pictures of his daughter, but @chrisalbon might have sealed this one when he co-opted speechbaby for his own campaign.
(3) @will_mccants vs. (14) @zackbeauchamp
Judges: 3-2 for @will_mccants (60% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@will_mccants: 115 (70%)
@zackbeauchamp: 49 (30%)
@zackbeauchamp impressed the judges enough to nearly sway their vote his way - and looks poised to be a much higher seed in next year’s competition - but @will_mccants’ wider reach gave him a dominant edge in the popular vote.
(7) @azmatzahra vs. (10) @mosharrafzaidi
Judges: 3-2 for @azmatzahra (60% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@azmatzahra: 85 (56%)
@mosharrafzaidi: 66 (44%)
This was a close match throughout the day, but in the end, the Frontline journalist edges out the Pakistani policy advisor by a narrow margin among judges and the public to advance to the second round.
(2) @intelwire vs. (15) @afpakchannel
Judges: 3-2 for @intelwire (60% of judges’ vote)
Popular vote:
@intelwire: 113 (63%)
@afpakchannel: 67 (37%)
Prolific CT/natsec aggregator/analyst @intelwire wins neatly over the New America/Foreign Policy afpak outlet.
The judges share their reasoning below.
@dianawueger
(1) @attackerman vs (16) @elsnarkistani
So I suppose I shouldn’t hold it against @attackerman that he was MIA on this, his day in the TwitterFightClub sun. He probably had a good reason. And as a pretty sad excuse for a Jew, I feel compelled to support the Jewish leaders I know personally, cause I figure that gets me points somewhere (I have an intentionally unsophisticated understanding of religion). And basically, Spencer’s twitterfeed is indispensable. And once upon a time I Photoshopped something for him, which I think is what convinced me that Twitter was awesome in the first place.
That said, @ElSnarkistani (nee @DanInKabul) is a force to be reckoned with. Seriously, if you’re not following this guy, do it. He’s smart, sassy, reads widely, writes intelligently, and used to have Grover in his avatar. Pretty sure his 2013 seed is gonna be a whole lot higher.
Point: @attackerman
(8) @fiverupees vs (9) @adamweinstein
This one was kind of a no-brainer for me, possibly because I didn’t know who FiveRupees was until yesterday morning and frankly, I still think of rupees as those diamonds from Zelda. So I just have trouble taking him seriously. And he wants to overthrow TwitterFightClub or make it less corrupt or something, and frankly, as a Selection Committee member, contestant, judge, and sponsor of TwitterFightClub, I find this abhorrent.
.png "Three Rupees")
Meanwhile, Adam Weinstein once participated in an extended conversation about assless chaps. He writes ideologically but intelligently, and he’ll go to the mat when he has to, and I just really appreciate the contributions he makes to the broader natsec discussion. Plus, y’know, that avatar? Killer.
Point: @adamweinstein
(5) @gregorydjohnsen vs (12) @smsaideman
So. Steve Saideman. He makes jokes all day (srsly, dude, when do you have time to teach?), is always engaging and witty, and while I don’t care much about the outcomes of Canadian politics, I’ve actually found myself more interested in the process as a result of this guy. Weird. Also, he went to my college, and if there is one thing I’m loyal to, it’s Oberlin. Kinda. Except when it smells like hippies. Anyway.
Meanwhile, Yemen? Who isn’t studying Yemen these days? So last year. Plus he thought he could win my affection by following me day-of. That is not how bribery works, my friend. Also Princeton just rejected me, so I’m going with the devil I know.
Point: @smsaideman
(4) @glcarlstrom vs (13) @gesfandiari
Aw man. I adore Gregg. Have I told y’all that? Gregg’s an awesome tweeter and writer, and I wish he were at least in my timezone so I could read his tweets more. Meanwhile, I wasn’t following @gesfandiari until, like, yesterday (though I’m glad I am now! she seems supercool.)
[I was gonna stick a photo of Gregg in here from when he was in DC and drinks were had but I can't seem to find it. Use your imagination!]
Point: @glcarlstrom
(6) @chrisalbon vs (11) @speechboy71
This matchup gladdened my heart. Barbs and babies were deployed in force (sidebar: have we considered deploying babies to Afghanistan? It was a pretty effective strategy here…). I feel like I should recuse myself, because I don’t want to break speechbaby’s heart and because Albon has been known to buy me beer or get me writing gigs or something, but that is apparently not how TwitterFightClub works (who wrote these rules!?).
On merits, this is pretty evenly matched. Both feeds are worth following (even if Twitter thinks @speechboy71 should be regularly unfollowed - but Twitter’s a dick). Both dudes are good, interesting, prolific dudes.
But seriously. LOOK AT THAT BABY.
Point: @speechboy71
(3) @will_mccants vs (14) @zackbeauchamp
I have so, so, so many conflicts of interest here. Both of these feeds are in my core “catch up on everything that happened today in five minutes” list. Both mix the humor and the serious and have intelligent conversations in 140-character bursts - and make it look easy. Zack is responsible for at least a third of the traffic G&L gets. But you know what, in the end, Will McCants introduced me to this video. And that’s actually what Twitter is about.
Point: @will_mccants
(7) @azmatzahra vs (10) @mosharrafzaidi
Hooo boy. This was another tough one, probably because they were both so unfailingly polite to one another all day. I think in the end this one goes to Azmat, simply for the breadth of topics she covers. Okay actually I just flipped a coin. Ugh.
Point: @azmatzahra
(2) @intelwire vs (15) @afpakchannel
Oh hell, more conflicts of interest? Whatever. You know both of these feeds are good, but while sometimes following @intelwire feels like walking up the down escalator - you are just never going to read everything - it’s always, always interesting and important stuff. Plus, Berger is a great guy who’s been one of the biggest Gunpowder & Lead supporters, and that kind of loyalty does not go unappreciated.
That said, @afpakchannel is worth following for sure. But…
Point: @intelwire
@drunkenpredator
First of all, let me thank the #TFC12 gods for some extraordinarily difficult choices in this bracket round. I reached my conclusions in three key ways:
1) Careful consideration of the totality of each contestant’s work.
2) Willingness to pander, fight, spar or otherwise debase themselves for my amusement.
3) Arbitrary snap judgments involving avatar photos.
@elsnarkistani vs. @attackerman: I loathe- truly loathe- the #TFC12 organizers for forcing me to choose between these two talented Tweeters in the first round. The former writes funny and thoughtful pieces on Afghanistan at It’s Always Sunny in Kabul; the latter is the senior reporter for Wired’s Danger Room. If @DaveedGR is the Ice Cube of natsec on Twitter, @attackerman is Jay-Z; an established superstar with old-school bonafides, excellent chops and mass-market appeal. To continue this analogy ad nauseam, @elsnarkistani is the Murs of the bunch; unquestionable legitimacy and cutting insights but with an underground freshness. Either of these guys could write 5,000 words on Afghanistan, defense policy or what they ate for breakfast, and I’d drop what I was doing to read it. But in recognition of the major stories he’s broken and his seamless integration of pop culture and national security, I have to pick the Carolina of the bunch and go with @attackerman. (Also, whenever he retweets me, I get a bunch of new followers, so…yeah. Bribes work, people.)
@fiverupees vs. @AdamWeinstein: I am a sucker for good Pakistan analysis, and @fiverupees’ blog of the same name on AsianCorrespondent.com provides that. However, I have to give it to Adam. Not because his writing is acerbic and entertaining, not because he’s a lot of fun to follow and his tweets are hilarious, but because he’s wearing some sailor uniform thing in his and eating snacks. You know. Like on the Cracker Jack box. It’s a thing.
@azmatzahra vs. @mosharrafzaidi: Azmat writes for PBS; Mosharraf is a policy adviser for the Pakistani Foreign Ministry. They insisted on being pleasant to each other during this matchup. This infuriated me equally. In the end, Azmat seems to like drones more than Mosharraf. She wins.
@will_mccants vs. @zackbeauchamp: This goes to McCants. Johns Hopkins is awesome, and McCants is a professor and looks like that crazy wizard dude from Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Zack self-describes as an apprentice, and also as a hobbit. And McCants wrote a book once, but it looks like it’s way above my reading level. So there’s that.
@gregorydjohnsen vs. @smsaideman: Both are talented academics and scrappy Twitter-fighters. Stephen accused Greg of taking a qat-induced nap. Greg tried to get me to violate Canadian sovereignty and bomb Stephen. However, Stephen got a head start by launching a coordinated campaign of flattery and sucking-up well in advance of Greg, and he likes french fries and gravy, which tips the scales in his adopted-Canadian favor.
@gesfandiari vs. @glcarlstrom: Gregg is wearing a ballistic vest in his profile picture. He wins. Sometimes it’s simple, people.
@intelwire vs. @afpakchannel: I find it easier to decide between institutional/institutional-ish accounts, and my personal preference is lower-volume Twitter feeds. Intelwire posts interesting stuff, but tons and tons of it. AfPak’s additional production value, and focus on one of my personal favorite conflict zones, gets my vote.
@chrisalbon vs. @speechboy71: This was one of my favorite battles. Chris accused Michael of resembling a burned-out Soviet artillery piece; Michael used an adorable baby (I think it was his, since he calls it Speechbaby, but I’m not sure) to sway the voting in his favor. Michael tried to use Chris’s ideological convictions against him; Chris implied Michael had helped Iran steal a fellow drone. Michael wrote a book; Chris has a Ph.D. Today, March 21, is nominally Michael’s birthday but I think he’s not beyond inventing that to influence the outcome. But Chris wins my vote, however, because in addition to offering me Brewer’s Art beers, many of his household appliances have become self-aware and launched Twitter accounts. Self-aware machines win every time.
@JasonFritz1
(1) @attackerman vs (16) @elsnarkistani
Two great tweeters who apparently had busy days on Wednesday – light traffic from both of them. Spencer’s had a pretty good week, winning an Ellie for Reporting in Digital Media and all. I’ll ignore the fact that Tom Ricks one of these awards and refrain from putting sarcasm quotes around prestigious, because it really is. We’ll also ignore that Twitter keeps unfollowing @elsnarkistani which I won’t take as a sign. Both gents are quick to witty remark and a retweet. But I have to tip towards @attackerman for mixing FP and whatever music kids these days listen to and his ability to drive the conversation.
(8) @fiverupees vs (9) @adamweinstein
Both tweeters are great at interacting with their many, many followers which is a huge factor for yours truly. @fiverupees throws out great commentary and is a cricket fan. Adam is a fantastic journalist who has done some excellent work on the Trayvon Martin tragedy this week, but attended a military academy which shall not be named and was not the one I attended. However, @adamweinstein is a Phillies phan so all is forgiven. Judgment favors Adam. We don’t have precedence to rely on here, folks.
(5) @gregorydjohnsen vs (12) @smsaideman
High volume tweeters. Princeton-type Yemen scholar versus Canadian-dwelling academic. I was a bit miffed at Johnsen’s following me today in an attempt to sway my vote. Especially as Saideman tweets with me often. One must look past pictures of robes, wands, and fanny packs and vote for @smsaideman.
(4) @glcarlstrom vs (13) @gesfandiari
Middle East reporter versus Iranian reporter – a Gulf showdown. Both journalists retweet, engage, and follow a good number of people. Today, Gregg worked out how to tweet a beer, which is just awesome. But until he can tweet a scotch to my apartment I remain unimpressed. However, I don’t really know Ms Esfandiari. And since they are both great tweeters with intriguing insights, similar rates of tweeting, I’m with the horse I know. Gregg, I forgive your not tweeting me a scotch and you get my vote.
(6) @chrisalbon vs (11) @speechboy71
This is the toughest matchup for me in this quadrant. I know both gentlemen personally and they’re prolific tweeters who enjoy a good debate and witty remark. Chris has had a good year, what with his successful PhD defense. His lessened tweeting after getting a real job (so seriously overrated) has lessened all of our Twitter experiences. Hell, I haven’t even seen his appliances tweeting much these days. Michael loves a good debate and will engage nearly anyone who says something he disagrees with, which is cool. There are some issues surrounding his antiquated handle and being a Red Wings fan. But good lord, he has a ridiculously cute baby. Seriously. Look at that kid. Adorable babies > snarky appliances. Advantage @speechboy71.
(3) @will_mccants vs (14) @zackbeauchamp
I’m not even sure where to start with this one. Both these guys are absolutely brilliant. So there’s no way to discern in that regard. Both prolific tweeters and engage with others as often, if not more often, than original tweets. But here’s the thing: Zack gives link love on his boss’ blog to those he follows, which means a lot to those of us who hang our sign on smaller blogs. That sort of magnanimity is extraordinarily rare. My vote goes to @zackbeauchamp.
(7) @azmatzahra vs (10) @mosharrafzaidi
These are two of my favorite tweeters that I’ve never met. There were even some very nice “you should follow the other” stuff going on today. A ploy to woo judges? Possibly, but it doesn’t matter. So how does one decide? Mosharraf tweets on hockey and cricket occasionally. @mosharrafzaidi gets the nod.
(2) @intelwire vs (15) @afpakchannel
These two are retweeting machines. And they retweet relevant stuff – which is obviously is rare on the internets. But @afpakchannel creates original material which takes up a lot of the feed. You just can’t beat that. @afpakchannel in a close one.
@robertcaruso
@ATTACKERMAN — Spencer Ackerman has no competition. Except Biggie. But he’s dead. So…there’s that.
@ADAMWEINSTEIN — He’s sexy and he knows it.
@GREGORYDJOHNSON — the man visits, studies and talks about Yemen and my beloved Horn of Africa. All day. No contest.
@GESFANDIARI — a rising star.
@CHRISALBON — a man so cool, his appliances talk to him. He doesn’t talk back.
@WILL_MCCANTS — the Jolly Green Giant happens to also be an actual giant in national security circles.
@MOSHARRAFZADI — he lives in Pakistan. He knows things. I respect him.
@INTELWIRE — not just one of but perhaps *the* purveyor of open source intelligence and analysis on critical national security issues.
@RogueAdventurer
You’ll have to forgive the rambling prose, as well as any typos or other errors that are scattered throughout what follows; I’ve been awake for over 24hrs and am relying solely on my good friends Laphroaig and Partagas to get me through this.
Match 1 – @attackerman vs @ElSnarkistani
This match-up, which I had expected to be one of the most active, turned out to be quite the opposite. As of 2100 EDT, both participants have only a handful of tweets. @ElSnarkistani has kept to his usual material of pointing out ISAF’s failings, whilst @attackerman has tweeted about… Tim Tebow’s Jewish-ish-ness. And has tweeted exactly four times. I had anticipated a tough fight from the 16 seed underdog (who polled his way to inclusion!), and a 1 seed leveraging his considerable network to sail to eventual victory. But as they say, you’ve got to be in it, to win it.
Winner: @ElSnarkistani
Match 2 – @AdamWeinstein vs @FiveRupees
@FiveRupees’ first #TFC12 tweet was a little concerning, but he soon got the hang of it, attempting the proven strategy of appearing to be an honourable, rational person – and voting for his opponent (or at least, saying he did). I’m not sure he won any favour with his promise to end Twitter Fight Club corruption; at least one judge was horrified by the prospect. @AdamWeinstein started up a little later, mostly focusing on the Trayvon Martin issue, including taking the time to call out a fellow journalist for speculating on the case. Unfortunately, there was not much in the way of #TFC12 tweeting, with the first reading as a realisation he was competing! (Seriously, have we not notified these guys, or something? [ed: nope!]) There wasn’t a lot to go on here, but I think @FiveRupees takes it by a hair, having mobilised a few supporters on Twitter, and covered a better range of topics.
Winner: @FiveRupees
Match 3 – @smsaideman vs @gregorydjohnsen
I was off to a good start when I read one competitor’s handle as ‘SMS Aide Man’, and nearly added @gregorydjohnson for the other, but all was soon cleared up. I’ll admit to following neither of these accounts before TFC, and so I didn’t really know what to expect (though I should point out that @smsaideman had the foresight to add me as soon as judges were announced, rather than on the day). As it turns out, this was a very engaging, well-fought match. Both competitors came out of their corners swinging, with @smsaideman tying himself to a crowd favourite early on. @gregorydjohnsen, on the other hand, quickly fired off two contradictory tweets; first promising that a vote for him was a vote against Saleh, and then threatening to turn to Saleh-style scare tactics. The struggle continued, with jibes about age, experience, and job placement being interspersed with interesting links and thoughtful commentary from both parties. @smsaideman tweeted Canadian immigration loopholes, F-35s, the Tolouse shooting, PolSci stuff (you know, that less war-y discipline), and – taking a page from @dandrezner – zombies. @gregorydjohnsen covered mostly Yemen, with a few other related odds and ends (AQAP etc) thrown in. Despite being called a potential insurgent, @gregoryjohnsen was also given an apparent endorsement by reigning champion @jeremyscahill, and runner-up @abumuqawama. There was also some talk of ballot stuffing thrown in for good measure. Despite the fact that I hate Harry Potter and all things associated with it, I’m giving this very close match to @smsaideman.
Winner: @smsaideman
Match 4 – @glcarlstrom vs @GEsfandiari
@GEsfandiari’s feed – and her blog – were both new to me, although I am certainly glad to have had them brought to my attention. @glcarlstrom I have followed for some time. This was another very sparse fight, with both competitors tweeting only a handful of times. Gregg wins for at least acknowledging #TFC12 was happening.
Winner: @glcarlstrom
Match 5 – @chrisalbon vs @speechboy71
This was clearly the match-up of the day, and proved to be a fantastic contest of snark, underhanded tactics, humour, and wit – all of the things we love the most about TFC. @chrisalbon was first out of the gate with these simple instructions, as well as arranging an alliance with @smsaideman. @speechboy71 hit back fast with a plea to the judges: “please don’t disappoint this cute baby”. Infants have proven a strong factor in #TFC12 already, but @chrisalbon was quick to point out his opponent’s use of child soldiers. “#stopcoheny” may be my favourite TFC tweet to date. Both contestants then went straight for the jugular; @chrisalbon questioning his opponent’s professional output, and @speechboy71 suggesting that Chris didn’t have any. Blatant appeals to the judges by both contestants, kept the battle rolling along, as did unsubstantiated attacks on each other – a TFC favourite. Both competitors managed to keep all of this interspersed with at least a little bit of interesting content on US domestic politics, sports, DoD governance structures, and so on. By far the best moment of the day, however, came when this happened:
Birthdays and babies are good – great! – but even last year’s runner-up agreed that Chris was busting out old school tactics. Thinking up responses to your opponent’s shameless pandering, and always having a quip ready to return fire with. This is, in my mind, what Twitter Fight Club is all about. A narrow victory to @chrisalbon!
Winner: @chrisalbon
Match 6 – @will_mccants vs @zackbeauchamp
I wanted to give this match to @will_mccants. I’ve followed his feed for a long time, and his material has been both of great interest, and great utility, to me since I clicked that ‘+’ sign. @zackbeauchamp, by comparison, was completely new to me. I had thought this would be an easy match for Will, and I was waiting to see what he would bring out. Unfortunately… not a lot. In fact, only a trio of tweets in the play period, as of 2030 EDT. @zackbeauchamp, on the other hand, really brought his A game to this fixture. He covered a broad range of topics, from drones, to religious freedom, and also took the time to call out an article which I happen to agree has received far too much attention for what it is. He also quickly recognised the vices of this particular judging panel. I really wanted to be able to give this to @will_mccants, but @zackbeauchamp pulled a deserved victory out of the hat today.
Winner: @zackbeauchamp
Match 7 – @AzmatZahra vs @mosharrafzaidi
This proved to be a sparse but rather close match, with both contestants covering a range of topics including Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, Abdul Sattar Edhi, economics, the UNSC statement on Syria, and a little sports. Both contestants were unfailingly nice to each other – which we hate to see; it makes judging so much harder! It was a tricky choice in the end, so I flipped a Guinness bottle top.
Winner: @AzmatZahra
Match 8 – @intelwire vs @afpakchannel
Well damn. This was another case where I had expected to see a serious competition. A team of writers struggling to best @intelwire’s consistently high-volume, on-point analysis. Instead, @afpakchannel – despite having a writing team at its disposal – fired off only a few tweets. Despite some early smack talk, the last tweet I read simply asked “Have you read the FOUR excellent pieces we’ve posted this week?” Well, no, but I have read the FOUR pretty average tweets you put up for #TFC12. @intelwire cruises to an easy (but still much deserved) victory, in my books.
Winner: @intelwire
