[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

re:extremist accusations

Now Zack, I really wasn't trying to be extremist.  :)  I apologize if it
sounded that way. But, I also think your basic premise is wrong. If I say
"Hey Zack, let's go have a beer," and your only reply is to turn your back
and ignore me, then you HAVE effectively refuted the proposal.
   This is not a debate round. If one side proposes something, and the other
"drops" it, it does not mean that the first wins by default. Not just you, but
pretty much all of the proMPJ rhetoric has been in an either/or format.
Actually, the "History" of this discussion goes back a couple of years. The
recent tirades after this nationals just triggered it this year. 
   I am glad to hear that you wouldn't be opposed to compromise. What areas 
do you think we can agree on? Where are there sticking points? With virtually
zero replies to any of the proposals it's hard to tell. I've put out several
points about why I'm reticent to see straight MPJ at the National tournament,
all of which have been ignored. I do keep seeing people say some are against
MPJ because they want adaption, but I've never even mentioned that. 
   My view (this time) has pretty much been that listing someone as an "A",
and having the experience to really "Prefer" them are two different things.
The stats show that most get their "As". My position is that just because a 
team gets an "A", it does not mean they have gotten a judge they've had
the personal experience to validly list as an "A". They are forced to list a
certain number of "As" whether they actually know them or not. The stats are 
skewed (at least for a tournament the size and diversity of CEDA Nats). A 
tangent of this position has been that this builds in an unfair imbalance into
the structure of the judge assignments. And that this is, by definition, 
something that is unfair and should be avoided. But I haven't seen word one as
to why this is untrue, doesn't happen, or is ok that it does. Your 
"probablilities" actually come out and say that there is always a 30% advantage
in one category for big schools. Now why would we want to do this? How is this
fair? Shouldn't the National tournament be as fair as possible?
   Let's start talking about what we can agree on. How do you feel about the 
compromise positions? Can one of them be a first step to MPJ at Nats?

                   Mark Whitney
                   SUNY Morrisville
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page