[eDebate] discussion: judge commitments at tournaments

Derek T Buescher dbuescher
Tue Nov 21 12:00:10 CST 2006


I want to add another elephant to the room/discussion. Jim's premise is that mpj is the best way to decide judge placement. Despite what I am about to say I am a fan of mpj, but I also think mpj is a significant problem because the default is to preference judges on, I may be overstepping the assumption here, two criteria: competency and style. The problem is that both of these criteria are based on the same logic. In other words, it is really perceived competency in style rather than competency and style. I am pretty sure this issue has been discussed at length. 
 
My suggestion is to rewrite the tab programs to stress mutuality as opposed to preference. That is, rework the programs to make the default preference to average lower than it currently does. Such a plan would solve for the judge commitment problem and work to increase representation of approaches, styles, and ideas. And I think it would alter the way the communities of debate define competency.
 
Derek Buescher
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20061121/66e1df62/attachment.html 



More information about the Mailman mailing list