Admiral's log, supplemental

A couple of things.

The idea of MJP at national tournaments may make a lot more sense than at local tournaments for the simple reason that many of the judges are totally unknown to debaters at national tournaments. The most avid supporter of judge adaptation can’t think that debaters must adapt to judges without any idea of how they should adapt. MJP at national tournaments reduces the mystery, so to speak. At Columbia, for instance, we in no way had what might be called a non-regional draw, aside from maybe one or two teams. In that case, MJP becomes a way to manipulate the pool to get judges who like you. But at, say, Big Jake, MJP would be a way to get judges who are familiar to you. Saying that all paradigms must be published some place is not really effective. Most written judge paradigms are the work of self-important sociopaths attempting to demonstrate their knowledge of debate strategies acquired through long hours of no other life whatsoever. Anything past a couple of sentences is TMI. The thing is, one can support MJP at national events for the simple reason that judge adaptation at those events is virtually impossible without it. One can dismiss MJP at local events for the same reason, that judge adaptation at those events is absolutely possible without it.

Meanwhile, CP’s post is not unlike my own various rantings about the problem schools that plague us tournament after tournament. I do not see a cure, but I do see a palliative, at least in the tabroom. We always post a closing date for judges for tournaments. So why not simply fine every school that changes judges (or loses judges, or whatever) not only with whatever financial punishment makes sense, but also with the simple elimination of their rankings/strikes? One of the problem schools at Columbia had two judges that didn’t show. Another changed judges more than once after the deadline. Simply take their students and make all their judges A+. You say I’m punishing the students for their coaches’ sins? No, I’m publishing the team. Those of you running sanctions understand how they work: aim them at the populace to enforce change. Do they punish the innocent? Not necessarily in the debate universe. The schools whose judges are weasels usually have student weasels as well. While fish may rot from the head, they get rotten through and through pretty quickly. Anyhow, it’s just a suggestion, and if nothing else, we’d derive satisfaction from it in tab. I’ll probably institute it at Bump next year, if nowhere else.