In which we promise never to discuss MJP again, at least for a couple of days

Here's CP: http://www.azuen.net/2014/02/10/semiotics/

I think we actually agree that ordinals are fine, if a tournament wants to do it that way. They're obviously more natural than any arbitrary tiering. I also vigorously agree that 25% 1s and 25% 2s is anything but MJP, especially in a large pool. That's why I've been recommending tiers of 8 or 9 judges, and not the rigid 6 tiers vs 9 tiers. I agree that distinctions need to be real between the tiers. Our only disagreement is the nature of that reality. I also believe that anything called mutual needs to be mutual. Call it mutual, and that's what people expect it to be. Changing people's expectations is not the solution to non-mutuality. The solution to non-mutuality is some other process with a different name.

From my perspective, running MJP now for a couple of years and watching most schools embrace it, I think we're nearing a point where the marketplace at large is getting ready for some ordinals. But I strongly believe that the marketplace needs to be taken into consideration. As I've been proselytizing for MJP, I've been working with all kinds of helpful nudges and explanations to explain why it's good for the users. Let's face it; starting out, and still in some quarters, MJP was the tool of the (circuit) devil. My pitch was that MJP beat back that particular devil. My putting in the Ci and Tr classifications was in aid of making that point, and making preffing that much easier (although honestly, most judges do consider themselves Ci, and, indeed, most of them are, but for people taking their first bicycle ride, training wheels are in order, even though it means they're not going to get very far). I would say that now, in the northeast, people pretty much expect MJP. I've been the one actively, publicly, pushing it. Lord knows, back when we were doing it in TRPC, it wasn't because it was easy for the tab staff. The goal remains the same: putting the determination of which judges should adjudicate which rounds equally into the hands of the competing debaters rather than the tab room staff. Ordinals no doubt does that better than tiers. The only thing is, it needs to be sold to the marketplace. Honestly, I don't think the market is ready for it yet. We'll need to do what we did with MJP in general, start with a carefully chosen venue and move from there.

This season is pretty much over, which means some time next year. Yale is too general, Bronx is too big, Monti is Academy. Hmmm. What's the first medium sized tournament that we might be able to try it at sometime in November...