Rai,+Prashant

Paradigm for UPenn '14:

The last debate I judged was three years ago at the TOC; this means a few things for you.

(1) I am not current with the norms of the activity; if certain kinds of arguments are now in style that were not several years ago, I might not understand them. I will do my best, but you have been warned that I do not have a body of experience on those arguments that fit the above description.

(2) I am not "in shape" with regard to flowing rounds. My hand might cramp if you go too fast, and I might not be able to discern the content of your arguments if you go too fast. Again, I do not mean to imply that I have an ideological problem with fast debate; I just am out of practice.

(3) My presumptions might be outdated. The following are the presumptions with which I am working: (a) theory arguments need demonstrated in-round abuse to constitute voting issues, (b) kritiks must prove the resolution false unless the debater demonstrates that I should vote for them on some alternate grounds, (c) absent pre-standards arguments, the default mechanism for evaluating the round is through impacts to the value criterion. All of these presumptions are of course rebuttable but they represent my default position.

(4) I have done zero research on this topic, and have seen zero rounds on this topic. This means that if there are acronyms that are commonly used in debates on this topic, I will be unfamiliar with them. If there are common arguments that debaters refer to with buzzwords (e.g., "Deep Ecology"), there is a high risk that I will be unfamiliar. Do not skip steps in your arguments on the assumption that I know where you are going. Presume that I do not know where you are going. That being said, I debated this topic when I was a student in 2004. I do have some memory of the arguments that people ran back then. But people's perspectives on the topic might very well have changed in the last 10 years, so you have been warned.

All of this being said, when I was a more active judge/coach, I think people considered me to be more on the "progressive" end of the spectrum so there is no reason to treat me like a lay judge or some curmudgeonly old-worlder. I say these things merely to disclaim any liability if one of these facts becomes a material issue in the round.

Consider my paradigm wisely when you do MJP; I am a hired judge and I have zero conflicts so there is a high likelihood that you will see my name in outround panels.