[eDebate] Compromise Prefs Proposal

Phil Kerpen kerpen
Mon Sep 30 15:26:55 CDT 2002

My initial premise is that no compromise should be willing to give up
mutuality.  Preference is nice; it allows debaters to debate in front of 
their favorite crtics and run what they like.  But mutuality is far more 
fundamental--it's the basis of fairness in judge assignment.  If both 
teams equally dislike the judge, then neither has an unfair edge.

Community prefs are deeply flawed.  Going back to that old TRM era concept 
would be a mistake.  It jacks a team that happens to dislike a critic that 
many other teams like.

Here's my proposal for balancing the values of preference with adaptation 
and ideological variation while maintaining mutuality:

ABCX rankings in various percentages. (30/30/30/10?)
Each teams gets:
2 rounds with BB judges
1 round with a CC judge
5 rounds with AA judges

These would be the tab room goals, with an understanding that a team could 
have a third BB if an AA is unavailable (although with the STA's 
backtrackign algorithm this is exceedingly unlikely).

Mutuality would never be overridden.

Phil Kerpen
Cell: 202.285.9714 // Fax and Voicemail: 202.478.0343

More information about the Mailman mailing list