I like both the new LD and PF topics. I can't remember when that's ever happened before.
Granted, in LD, the topic doesn't matter much at a lot of tournaments, but the whole idea of a jury's ignoring the law is a fascinating one. If I remember correctly, earlier versions of this rez had judges actually advising the juries to ignore the law, which is a non-starter, but here it's just juries coming to a conclusion dissimilar from statutory dicta. Which, of course, is occasionally what the Supes do. Fun stuff. Not a bad roll-off from the Modest Novice either, come to think about it. Hello, legal positivism!
In PF, I can't imagine a more timely topic, and the wording is fine. This would have been a home run topic in the old days of LD, with social contracts and the like in play. What PFers will make of it is probably something else, but the wisest ones will at least learn those particular Lockean ropes, and make what hay of them they can.
The NDCA has reared its lovely head recently, in aid of this year's board elections. If you're a member, or want to be a member, make sure you've paid your dues. The tournament this year is in Orlando, and I'm willing to predict that it will be pretty much shenanigan-free. Why the LD community hasn't embraced this one in droves is beyond me. Then again, sheep are notoriously...sheepish.
I'm going to be out of commission for a couple of days, coming up for air on Sunday to start clearing Rather Large Bronx judge requests. Then we slide into Monticello and, a week from that, RLB itself. May the Force be with us.
No comments:
Post a Comment