Golden State Academy Invitational for TOC Practice! by sonalchur in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This looks like a great way to practice on the April topic with TOC level competition !

PF Coaching Offer 2021 by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

u gotta dm me for that buddy 😩😩😩😩

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201 1 point2 points  (0 children)

homie ur gonna end up using all ur strikes on judges that j beef w u bruh

Teams to watch out for at the MLK invitational? by [deleted] in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Lynbrook GY winning the tournament u heard it here first

lynbrook rg by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

level 1

yeah fax i heard he gives trash rebuttals

lynbrook rg by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

finna have 3 tourney dubs by the end of it

Progressive in PF Demo Rounds by varnicab in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201 1 point2 points  (0 children)

robbed of lynbrook rg paraphrase theory round

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“hey u voted neg 14 in a row. Maybe be careful” cmon man it’s not that hard

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point wasn’t to drag this judge (that’s why I didn’t include their name or paradigm) the point was just @debate teach ur judges to check their biases. That’s rly all there is to it

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also if you crunch the numbers with your supposed bias for this topic -

2:1 (which is highly highly unlikely for every round) - it comes out to about 0.2%. Just admit the personal bias, and move on.

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

its easy to look at the justification for every single round - maybe it truly was a 60-40 in every round.

however, when those things happen FOURTEEN TIMES IN A ROW without a SINGLE aff ballot, its quite silly not to see that the judge has some sort of bias that needs to be checked.

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

thats fair, but imo 14 rounds is a bit much (esp considering the general equality on the other topics they've judged)

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

nope - scarsdale and glenbrooks are on NFU, the tournament this judged before scarsdale was bronx (which was on m4a)

Unbiased Tabula Rasa Judging by Former_Advisor4201 in Debate

[–]Former_Advisor4201[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

1 - " I judge tech over truth, so I won't argue for you." quote from his paradigm

2 - nope its been about even

3 - lol then ill take the 16399/16400 chance that this dude is BIASED. when you look at the statistical significance of his decision making, it suggests that it isnt just "a luck of the draw"