Prasad,+Vinay


 * The debater on the affirmative side must prove that the resolution is more likely true than false. The debater on the negative side must prove that the resolution is more likely false than true.
 * Each debater must submit and defend an explicit normative standard. He or she must use this normative standard as a premise in arguing his or her side. The normative standard may take the value-value criterion structure, as is the convention. I will choose between competing normative standards based on the rigor, consistency, and reasonableness (i.e. intuitive appeal) with which each debater presents justification.
 * I will determine the accuracy of the descriptive premises presented by each debater to the best of my ability. This task will require that I draw on my own knowledge in addition to the evidence presented by each debater. In this sense I will "intervene." The act of judging, that is, determining the truth of competing claims, by nature requires some degree of intervention, such that all judges are "interventionist."
 * I will use the definitions that best reflect linguistic convention and technical accuracy.
 * I will choose between competing interpretations of the resolution based on balance and relevance.