JPP Debate tournament - interest list

Nikola Tesla said:
Mott, you're clearly upset at the fact that we, the Youngins, are damned good at rational argumentation when we so choose. But it really shouldn't surprise you in all your prolapsed posterity. We're young, ambitious, quite dedicated to politics, all students of classical debate, etc. It would be natural that we debate well, regardless of the judges.
Click to expand...
To which I would retort. Put up or shut up.
 
I think if we do have another debate contest then a new rule should be implemented. No default winners. If your opponent doesn't show up to honor their commitment to debate then you cannot be advanced via default. Something to that affect. No one should be advanced by default. We also need to shore up the judging. We need judges who know how to score a debate objectively. Besides having one judge just dissappear we had two other judges, which it was all to obvious, scored based on either their bias towards a particular contestant of based on their bias for a particular issue. I'll take responsibility for that but between promoting contestants by default and the god awful judging, the first debate tournament turned into a travesty.

Though on the bright side, there were several qood quality debates and the format of the actual debates worked out quite well.
 
mott, please stop lying about me. I judged the debates very fairly, and as I said, I sided multiple times on the side I did not agree with. I resent you charging me with being unfair. You lost because you deserved to lose. It's been 2 years and I forgot my reasoning, but I remember at the time I wrote it all out.

The other thing is, in spite of saying how baised the judges were, if you remember correctly, the board agreed with the judges decisions on probably about 90-95% of the debates. there were only 1 or 2 upsets. So whatever was happening, it coalesced into supporting what everyone else thought anyway.

Lastly, this thing will never work without my sheer force of will. If grind isn't behind something on JPP, it never gets off the ground :)
 
F-ck yeah Oatmeal Pies said:
mott, please stop lying about me. I judged the debates very fairly, and as I said, I sided multiple times on the side I did not agree with. I resent you charging me with being unfair. You lost because you deserved to lose. It's been 2 years and I forgot my reasoning, but I remember at the time I wrote it all out.

The other thing is, in spite of saying how baised the judges were, if you remember correctly, the board agreed with the judges decisions on probably about 90-95% of the debates. there were only 1 or 2 upsets. So whatever was happening, it coalesced into supporting what everyone else thought anyway.

Lastly, this thing will never work without my sheer force of will. If grind isn't behind something on JPP, it never gets off the ground :)
Click to expand...
It wasn't you I was talking about.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It wasn't you I was talking about.
Click to expand...

.

Besides having one judge just dissappear we had two other judges, which it was all to obvious, scored based on either their bias towards a particular contestant of based on their bias for a particular issue.
Click to expand...

Bro we only had 3 judges.

(though now that you mention it, didn't we get a replacement judge somewhere along the line?)


 
If we have a debate maybe we should make all contestants names anonymous until after the debate has ended? That would certainly reduce one form of bias. Though it could decrease the level of interest as spectators love a good match up.
 
yes mott, anonymous is a good idea. but the problem is the way they are matched up. I guess we would need some type of debate coordinator that rands the debates and then pm's the two to get started and post anon
 
F-ck yeah Oatmeal Pies said:
.



Bro we only had 3 judges.

(though now that you mention it, didn't we get a replacement judge somewhere along the line?)
Click to expand...

I believe in the first contest I had originally volunteered to be a judge until I realized it would be ten times more work than being a contestant and hundred times more work than being a spectator.....I also believe in the second contest we had a judge who vanished and was replaced.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top