December 23, 2016

On Enthymemes and Tabula Rasa (Bob Overing)

Bob introduces the idea of enthymemes, suggesting that they pose difficult problems for tabula rasa judges. The question is not if judges must intervene, but how and when?
November 22, 2016

3 Judges Who Annoy Bob Overing

Bob says there are three obvious maxims that some judges aren't following: (1) pay attention, (2) don’t intervene, and (3) judge fairly.
October 13, 2016

Plans are Good: September-October 2016 Edition (Bob Overing)

In this edition of The Meta, Bob applies the typical pragmatic justifications for plans to the September/October 2016 topic. In a surprising twist, he also makes semantic arguments for plans -- what do you think?
August 3, 2016

What Does It Mean To Vote on an RVI

In this edition of The Meta, Bob rehearses some common arguments for disclosure in more depth by imagining the same debate in a world with disclosure and a world without it. He then moves on to tackle Martin Sigalow's recent blog post in opposition to disclosure.
July 8, 2016

When Theory is Drop the Argument, But There’s No Argument to Drop

In this edition of The Meta, Bob rehearses some common arguments for disclosure in more depth by imagining the same debate in a world with disclosure and a world without it. He then moves on to tackle Martin Sigalow's recent blog post in opposition to disclosure.
March 17, 2016

Disclosure Enhances Creativity (Bob Overing)

In this edition of The Meta, Bob rehearses some common arguments for disclosure in more depth by imagining the same debate in a world with disclosure and a world without it. He then moves on to tackle Martin Sigalow's recent blog post in opposition to disclosure.
March 15, 2016

On Spikes and Bob with a Hint of Norse Gods — Marshall Thompson

About a week ago Bob Overing posted a response to an article that I wrote last year, in which I criticize the way debaters and judges […]
March 8, 2016

Theory Advocates – Bob Overing

In this edition of The Meta, Bob takes up Chris Palmer's idea that all theory arguments must contain interpretation evidence, AKA theory advocates. He also rambles on about why theory isn't exclusionary.
February 28, 2016

Spikes and ‘Better Debating’ – Bob Overing

Bob discusses Marshall's position on spikes and why it might be too quick to dismiss them as not contributing to 'better debating.'
February 11, 2016

Cal Berkeley 2016 – Varad Agarwala wins

Main Tournament Round 1 Pairings | Results Round 2 Pairings | Results Round 3 Pairings | Results Round 4 Pairings | Results Round 5 Pairings | […]
February 11, 2016

Harvard 2016 – Dani Reyes wins

Tournament Results Bracket Finals Valley DR def Cambridge OS 2-1. Congratulations to both Danielle and Oliver! Semis Cambridge OS def Wilson MF Valley DR def Lake […]
January 23, 2016

Evaluative Modesty: Reply to Chessman

Bob continues his discussion of modesty applied to ROBs by dealing with objections raised to his recent article by Christian Chessman.