Section 17: The final round of CEDA Nationals shall have an
odd number of judges, between 9 and 13 as determined by the below criteria.

A. (1) Each regional representative shall provide a judge
and an alternate to judge the final round at the national tournament.

(2) If, by the close of registration, a region has not
presented the Tournament Director with the name of a judge selected by their
region for the final round panel, that region’s slot shall be forfeited.

(3) Following the conclusion of the debating in the
quarter-final round, the debaters shall preference any regionally selected
judge, including any alternate which may assigned to the finals round panel,
who were not on the original preference sheet. No restrictions shall be placed
on the preferences.

B. (1) Any remaining slots on the final round judging panel
shall be filled with available judges, maximizing mutuality and preference
based on each teams mutual preference judging rankings.

(2) As soon as possible after the semi-finalists are
identified, the tournament staff shall post a list of judges they believe to be
available who are highly preferred by the remaining teams with a request that
they makes themselves available to judge the final round.

Effective Date:

Next Ceda Nationals following passage of the amendment

Rationale:

This amendment is an update of the previous criteria for
final round panel selection. The previous language references a 9 category
system of MPJ which is not the system currently employed at CEDA Nationals.
Using more general language we can give the tab staff flexibility while still preserving
the addition of mutuality and preference on the panel. Additionally, the
previous language had the potential inequity of allowing two judges to be
placed to “balance” the high ranking of one regionally selected
judge.