NOM

Did I miss the April 2021 NOMference scores tally? I didn't see them anywhere, so I tried to add them up myself as I'm still on the hook to choose the next few EQ lessons.

MoPag, I have even more respect for you for doing this in the past. Its like living through conference all over again!

Without further adieu (that's the hebrew word, not the french)... Spring 2021 NOMference Scores:

Sat AM
Nelson -20
Uchtdorf 50
Jones -240
Newman -48
Stevenson 65
Gong -40

Sat PM
Holland -65
Becerra -30
Renlund -70
Anderson -INF
Mutombo 45
Ballard 20

Priesthood
Cook -40
Corbitt -15
Nielson -30
Eyring -20
Oaks 0
Nelson -10

Sun AM
Soares 20
Aburto 105
Palmer 10
Dube 80
Teixeria 3
Wakolo 2
Wong 6
The 22
Nelson -130

Sun PM
Oaks 50
Rasband -60
Dyches -40
Chistofferson -360
Walker 0
Bednar -220
Nelson -140


Straight Rank
Aburto 105
Dube 80
Stevenson 65
Uchtdorf 50
Oaks 50
Mutombo 45
The 22
Ballard 20
Soares 20
Palmer 10
Wong 6
Teixeria 3
Wakolo 2
Oaks 0
Walker 0
Nelson -10
Corbitt -15
Nelson -20
Eyring -20
Becerra -30
Nielson -30
Gong -40
Cook -40
Dyches -40
Newman -48
Rasband -60
Holland -65
Renlund -70
Nelson -130
Nelson -140
Bednar -220
Jones -240
Chistofferson -360
Anderson -INF


Special metion to Anderson for scoring NOM's first ever NEGATIVE INFINITY!

I'm still pissed that Nelson ruined what would have been our first ever positive session score Sunday morning. What a Debbie Downer!

Mormorrisey wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 13, 2021 8:57 am

I'm still pissed that Nelson ruined what would have been our first ever positive session score Sunday morning. What a Debbie Downer!

So much forward momentum obliterated by a single talk.

Can you add a summary that supports the score?

For those of us HAM’s that didn’t watch it?

græy wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 13, 2021 9:31 am

Mormorrisey wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 13, 2021 8:57 am

I'm still pissed that Nelson ruined what would have been our first ever positive session score Sunday morning. What a Debbie Downer!

So much forward momentum obliterated by a single talk.

My TBM DW told me this was her favorite talk. So for the willfully ignorant, it wasn’t necessarily a bad score.

Red Ryder wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 13, 2021 9:37 am

Can you add a summary that supports the score?

For those of us HAM’s that didn’t watch it?

I like you RR. But, no.

So, for the first time ever Oaks ended with a positive score??

2bizE wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 13, 2021 12:14 pm

So, for the first time ever Oaks ended with a positive score??

it has to be close...