Hacker News Reader

Comment by thaumasiotes | Hacker News Reader

That's not a problem with debate. It's a problem with the judges. They are apparently quite willing to be open about the fact that they won't actually do their jobs:

> Below are quotes from written judge preferences from the 2023 Tournament of Champions across all four formats

> Before anything else, including being a debate judge, I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist... I cannot check the revolutionary proletarian science at the door when I’m judging... I will no longer evaluate and thus never vote for rightest capitalist-imperialist positions/arguments...

View on HN

Debate has always been corrupted by the practice of last winners driving the contest to ridiculousness, such as the focus on talking quickly over quality content.

But why are the organizers choosing judges who refuse to judge?

Presumably because the wrong people might win.

Winning a debate doesnt make your argument truer. It just means your opponent was weaker than you at making his argument. Agree or not with that judge but he makes a good point about favouring the validity of an argument over the ability of the debater.

> Agree or not with that judge but he makes a good point about favouring the validity of an argument over the ability of the debater.

This is not correct; for an argument to be valid, the conclusion must follow from the premises.

That judge is saying he will vote based on the conclusion regardless of the premises.

Apropos, This American Life, Episode 402, Act Two: I'd Like To Spank The Academy

> For the last 13 years, the University of Montevallo in Alabama has held an event called "The Life Raft Debate," where several professors take the stage and each tries to convince the students that his or her discipline—chemistry, say, or communications—is the most essential field of study. But in 2007, a professor named Jon Smith decided that the debate itself needed saving. Producer Nancy Updike tells the story. (14 minutes)

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/402/save-the-day/act-two-22

> But why are the organizers choosing judges who refuse to judge?

Debate tournaments happen after school or on weekends.

So you need about one adult volunteer for every two to four students. The adult needs to be willing to show up to a school for an entire evening or an entire weekend and listen to 5+ hours of high schoolers debating one another.

You can sometimes make do with fewer volunteers by using coaches as judges. But coaches also need to run the tournament, help organize volunteers, not burn out, and... well... coach.

By and large, outside of the most elite tournaments, organizers don't have the luxury of choosing judges. It's far more common to have 7 judges for 10 rounds than to have 10 judges for 7 rounds.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com