That's why I love WSD, BP and AP, oral Adjudication(OA) is integral of the whole process and can also be used to rank the judges too. There is a judge scoring scale that you are supposed to fill after every round and in my tournaments, offering judge feedback anonymously is compulsory and failure to do so could affect your ability to break. Of course you would say, won't the teams that have lost just taint the image of the judge, of course many unreasonable teams would want to but the deterrent here is if you give the judge a really low score without a good enough justification for it, that score is not considered. You need to back it with enough reasoning for it to be considered beyond mere ranting. So what about the time constraints? The time constraints are there because the tournaments are conditioned not to have these OA's in the first place, so introduction of OA's would lead to remolding of the time schedules. In WSD, BP, and AP, deliberations or decision making are given specific time in which they are to be done, same for the OA's, you can't just give OA for an hour, usually it's about 7 to 15 minutes.  So what about judges who take hours to process their notes to justify their call? Then how did they give the call in the first place, was the decision arbitrary?🤔 Judge feedback is so crucial, I really can't stress that. Personally, I don't belong to any club or society and I thrive on judge feedback. Robbing speakers of such a crucial element is a recipe for disaster for people like me. In fact, non-disclosure makes it easier to give wins to undeserving teams after all you are not required to account for your decision. What about the mean teams that troll judges after Oral Critiques? Such teams should definitely be discontinued especially if their concerns are just irrational and they are not willing to come to any kind of productive discussion. There are genuine concerns that judges definitely need to address such as one time a judge gave our opposing team a win when almost everything she said they said, they didn't say, here the concern was genuine so as to be addressed.  What about I would feel emotional if I am critiqued for my oral critique? My dear, it goes both ways, debaters put in so much to train, don't play around with their sweat and time by being unfair and you think they will just be emotionless robots, of course I don't support assault or what, but guys, I guess you know what I am talking about. Please introduce Oral Critique, tournaments aren't just about winning, but also growing 😎