In which we get closer to Rather Large Bronx

I’ve been chivvying up people to get their paradigms in for Rather Large Bronx. I’m rather surprised by the number of seriously solid LD judges without paradigms, but I have a feeling that this is a result of the loss of the wiki, and not obduracy on their part. It is nice to see everything in one place on tabroom, though. The list of judges shows whether or not they have a paradigm up. Thank you, Professor CP. As we get closer to the deadline, aside from more nudging, I’ll send them emails directly to get them off the schneid. And we really will drop their sorry keisters if they don’t do it.

I sent out a new How To Judge PF doc (http://www.jimmenick.com/vault/PF_intro.pdf). It’s not much different from my previous one, but this time there’s pictures and some info on evidence challenges. Evidence challenges seem to have diminished, though. Once teams started to realize that, A) tab wasn’t empowered to do anything, and B) they had to go all in during the round, they ceased seeing this as a cheap way to possibly win a round. I certainly don’t believe that all evidence (much evidence?) is perfect, but I also don’t believe that the PF world is filled with freebooters making this stuff up. Which, of course, is one of the reasons why I prefer dealing with real teams with real coaches, where there’s someone reputable and experienced in control. Kid-run teams and independents? Not so much.

Pennsylvania Jeff, who’s working with Kaz on Bronx Policy tab, sent us info yesterday that the NSDA had modified their internet usage rule in the latest Rostrum. Sadly, it wasn’t posted when I went to check it out (not that I didn't believe Jeff, but there might be other stuff of note, especially on PF), but we did pass it on to the Bronx Poobahs. Essentially it says you can do research if you want, but why would you want? No communication though, although as I’ve said about both these things, they don’t make a lot of sense. The only viable cheating scenario is that you have a scout in the round digging into research while the round is happening and passing it along to you in camera. But this is a level of cheating worthy of Facebook conspiracy nuts. It’s not so much who has the personnel, as who has the motivation? I can’t imagine there would be a lot of personal satisfaction over winning a round this way. And if debate isn’t about a team’s personal satisfaction, what’s the point?