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

Defending Korcok (resp. to Bear)

I really wanted to stay out of the Bear - Korcok bipolar strife, but I 
just really feel I need to make one small comment. 

Bear's comments about not flowing may give some the impression that he 
believes Korcok is a "lazy" judge or doesn't try very hard. I hope this 
isn't Bear's intent but I am afraid that he might gbe interpreted that way.

Mike Korcok and I have disagreed on a number of issues, and have had some 
presonal disagreements (his armchair psychology pummeling me into bits 
three years ago), but I think Mike is honestly one the best critics 
available to any debater in this activity whether he flows or not. Now, I 
don't want to sit here and toot his horn too much, but whenever he judged 
us, or whenever I saw him judging anyone, I was always very much under 
the impression that he worked very hard to be the best critic he could. 
When he spoke at NDI 2 years ago I was impressed by his philosophy about 
judging (try as hard as you can) and his candor about the humanity of 
critics (all critics make mistakes). I haven't agree with every decision 
he made, but I'd be thrilled to know any of our debaters have him as a 
critic.

Now, none of this should be taken to demean Bear or independently justify 
the act of not flowing. That is not my intention, but I was really 
interested in knowing the answer to the original question which started 
this thread, which is, "Why are some of the most respected judges on the 
circuit occassionally choosing not to flow?" 

I would personally be horrified by the prospect of trying to render a 
decision without my flow (of course, this is my first year in the judging 
pool). Rather than blindly lambast those who are doing something unusual 
simply because we either don't understand it, or can't imagine its 
effectiveness (which seem Bear's positions), why not try to listen for 
some explanation and learn from it? Many debaters seem happy with the 
results and I'm very intrigued. 

If it turns out that the answer is "I never bring enough paper" or 
"Nothing is worth writing down" (as in the one case cited by the offended 
debater), I can understand people being upset. I get a funny feeling, 
though that there is a lot more to it than that.

Pat Gehrke
Chico
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page