[eDebate] lay judges are most as good as lay debaters

Schizo Liberation Front schizoliberation
Thu Sep 26 05:28:35 CDT 2002


the problem w puttin a fuckin idiot off the street in the back of the room 
is that there is zero objectivity and maybe not even a decision.  there may 
be zero objectivity in debate judge decisionmaking as ross says but he sure 
as hell believes that your average professional judge has a degree of 
objectivity more than your average non-professional judge and hence he 
always ranks the pros on the tournament sheet when he wants his debaters to 
be judged by someone with regards to their dabaiting and he evaluates their 
progress only based on what professionals have to say since they are more 
qualified.  i mean, don't you usually assume that you are going to evaluate 
the effects of the plan, the good and the bad, sometimes in relation to a 
net-benefit of a counterplan or most other times the assumptions of the plan 
under critique or the negative doesn't have anything to say about the plan 
then topicality in the 2NR?  the good thing about pros is that they already 
know the order of the speeches and are really familiar with timekeeping.  
they are more likely to be fair and objective about the rules than fuckin 
idiots off the street.  there is so much objectivity that the pros share in 
common that justifies relative insular dabaiting communities.

slf

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com





More information about the Mailman mailing list