In Defence of Moral Error Theory

Moral error theorists typically accept two claims - one conceptual and one ontological - about moral facts. The conceptual claim is that moral facts are or entail facts about categorical reasons (and correspondingly that moral claims are or entail claims about categorical reason); the ontological claim is that there are no categorical reasons-and consequently no moral facts-in reality. I accept this version of moral error theory and I try to unpack what it amounts to in section 2. In the course of doing so I consider two preliminary objections that moral error theory is (probably) false because its implications are intuitively unacceptable (what I call the Moorean objection) and that the general motivation for moral error theory is self-undermining in that it rests on a hidden appeal to norms. | Direct Link to PDF

Moral Minds: The Nature of Right and Wrong

THE CENTRAL IDEA of this book is simple: we evolved a moral instinct, a capacity that naturally grows within each child, designed to generate rapid judgments about what is morally right or wrong based on an unconscious grammar of action. Part of this machinery was designed by the blind hand of Darwinian selection millions of years before our species evolved; other parts were added or upgraded over the evolutionary history of our species, and are unique both to humans and to our moral psychology. These ideas draw on insightsfrom another instinct: language. | Direct Link to PDF (e-book)

Oxford Studies in Metaethics

The full book is available online for free:Oxford Studies in Metaethics is designed to collect, on an annual basis, some of the best new work being done in the field of metaethics. I’m very pleased to be able to present this third volume, one that has managed so successfully to fulfill the aims envisioned for the series. | Direct Link to Book

Moral Judgment

i. Moral rules are held to have an objective, prescriptive force; they are notdependent on the authority of any individual or institution.ii. Moral rules are taken to hold generally, not just locally; they not only proscribebehavior here and now, but also in other countries and at other times in history.iii. Violations of moral rules involve a victim who has been harmed, whose rightshave been violated, or who has been subject to an injustice.iv. Violations of moral rules are typically more serious than violations ofconventional rules. | Direct Link to PDF

Boredom? ADHD?

John Plotz in the New York Times: Their Noonday Demons, and Ours

These days, when we try to get a fix on our wasted time, we use labels that run from the psychological (distraction, “mind-wandering” or “top-down processing deficit”) to the medical (A.D.H.D., hypoglycemia) to the ethical (laziness, poor work habits). But perhaps “acedia” is the label we need. After all, it afflicted those whose pursuits prefigured the routines of many workers in the postindustrial economy. Acedia’s sufferers were engaged in solitary, sedentary, cerebral effort toward a clear final goal — but a goal that could be reached only by crossing an open, empty field with few signposts. The empty field is the monk’s day of spiritual contemplation in a cell besieged by the demon acedia — or your afternoon in a coffee shop with tiptop Wi-Fi.

via

Obama/Clinton?

Nobel Prize winner and former US Secretary of Labor, Robert Reich, makes the case for the "natural" Obama/Clinton ticket in 2012:

Why do I say this? Because Obama needs to stir the passions and enthusiasms of a Democratic base that’s been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans. Hillary Clinton on the ticket can do that.

via

The Boundaries of Justice

The overarching concern in the idea of justice is the need to have just relations with others—and even to have appropriate sentiments about others; and what motivates the search is the diagnosis of injustice in ongoing arrangements. In some cases, this might demand the need to change an existing boundary of sovereignty—a concern that motivated Hume’s staunchly anti-colonial position. (He once remarked, “Oh! How I long to see America and the East Indies revolted totally & finally.”) Or it might relate to the Humean recognition that as we expand trade and other relations with foreign countries, our sentiments as well as our reasoning have to take note of the recognition that “the boundaries of justice still grow larger,” without the necessity to place all the people involved in our conception of justice within the confines of one sovereign state.

Amartya Sen, in The National Review, "The Boundaries of Justice."

What Position Will Win the TOC?

First, I just want to give a shout-out to the Mountain Brook tournament in Birmingham. This is the second year I've been, and once again the hospitality and timeliness have been exceptional. Jeff Roberts really goes out of his way to bring good judges to the tournament and put on a good show (and the MB students do a great job keeping things running). If you live in the South and don't make it to this tournament, you're missing out!On to the substance of today's post: what position will win the TOC?

I'll try not to answer my own question (since I'm more interested in others' thoughts), but I will say this: debaters are doing themselves a strategic disservice by running away from the plausibly true positions on this topic. I describe the loss as a "strategic" one, because I'm reasonably certain that no one will be persuaded by pedagogical risks.

The debates that start off on dubious premises (thanks to ridiculous case positions) almost always become side-tracked by theoretical and procedural questions that can rarely be resolved predictably. This is especially true in elimination rounds against strong competitors—the marginal utility of a "non-stock" position is significantly diminished when assured that your opponent will either shift the debate to theory or respond with an even more "outside the box" argument. The race to the bottom of absurdity can quickly become a counterproductive exercise, or one that at best terminates in a coin-flip decision.

While I hesitate to make any predictions, I certainly hope that high-level debates will explore the contextually unique accounts of self-defense that tend to permeate this topic in real-world discussion. I believe that the most researched account of this issue can and should take center stage. Off-the-wall positions may be decisive in prelims and lesser tournaments, but the most consistently and universally successful positions are true ones.

What do you expect to see come out on top?

Three Judging Practices That Need To Stop by Adam Torson

All of these practices are tempting, but a moment’s reflection should suggest to most judges that they are inappropriate.

1. Speaker Point Games

Enough with the paradigms that promise increased speaker points for goofy behavior. You might think it’s hysterical to promise a thirty for bringing you a cookie, saying “supercalifragilisticexpialidocious,” or dancing a jig, but it’s not. Judging is not about you – the debaters aren’t there for your entertainment.

If it were harmless fun nobody would care, but speaker points matter. They affect who you debate in prelims (especially later in a tournament when brackets are smaller), whether you break, and out-round seeding. On more than one occasion I have seen a speaker point game change who breaks and who doesn’t. It’s not fair, and it should stop.

2. Berating Debaters

A certain amount of irritation at poorly debated rounds is natural, but it’s stunning how often judges go way over the top. Expressing outrage at the state of debate or the obnoxiousness of some particular practice may be cathartic, but it’s hardly constructive. Getting angry and berating debaters is self-indulgent; the oral critique is not about your anger. It is reprehensible to be proud of making a debater cry.

Sometimes anger is appropriate, as when a debater is rude or patently offensive, but this is relatively rare. Yelling at someone because they made an argument you don’t like suggests a dramatic lack of perspective – the kids are learning what a good argument is, people have different views on what a good argument is, and students are coached in different ways. The RFD is not about showing off how smart you are or how much you know about debate. Get over yourself and make your comments constructive. You are not entitled to adjudicate a tournament full of mistake free rounds.

3. Calling Tons of Evidence

Everyone seems to want debaters to be clearer, but many of us engage in a practice that incentivizes exactly the opposite. The debaters’ opportunity to effectively convey the meaning of their evidence is the constructive. Figuring out what evidence means after the round and making it part of the decision calculus is blatant intervention. There are judges who routinely call virtually every argument read in the round and reconstruct their flow on that basis. Give me a break.

I suspect this is mostly motivated by ego – none of us likes to admit that we didn’t understand an argument. But – I feel like a broken record – it’s not about you. It is unfair and pedagogically unsound to vote for arguments you straight up don’t understand – even more so when you are doing things like supplying evidence comparison for the debaters. Have enough courage to admit when you don’t get something, even at the risk of teenagers thinking you’re not as smart as they otherwise would.

PV Peninsula Closes Out St. Marks

 Dallas, TX - Congratulations to PV Peninsula's Arjun Tambe and Akhil Jalan for closing out the 2014 Heart of Texas Invitational at St. Marks! Arjun and Akhil won the top two speaker awards in addition to closing out the regular tournament! Congratulations to both debaters! Arjun and Akhil are coached by Scott Wheeler and Chris Theis.St. Marks is a octafinals bid tournament to the Tournament of Champions. There will be 6 preliminary rounds, with 4 prelims on Saturday, and 2 on Sunday, with double and octafinals. The remaining elimination rounds will be held on Monday.Congratulations to Peninsula's Akhil Jalan and Arjun Tambe for winning 2nd and 3rd speaker, respectively. Congratulations to Harker's Pranav Reddy for winning top speaker. (just kidding, they were 1st and 2nd.) Pairings can be found on Tabroom: https://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/index.mhtml?tourn_id=3151Prelim Recordshttps://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/results/ranked_list.mhtml?event_id=29470&tourn_id=3151 Double OctafinalsDulles KS def. Evanston EW (Shmikler, Harris, Fife)Dulles NB def. Greenhill MM (Barnes, Popatia, Knell)Greenhill BE def. Strake Jesuit ATo (Chen, Paramo, Baker)Westwood SN def. St. Thomas JB (Wei, Wright, Zhou)Greenhill VA def. Marcus LH (Malis, Theis, Tripe)Harvard-Westlake CC def. Lake Highland NK (Fink, Sharma, Gravley)Greenhill GB def. Evanston JS (Fink, Paramo, Theis)Strake Jesuit AT def. Lake Highland SP (Wright, Shmikler, Harris)Peninsula AJ def. Stony Point RJ (Alderete, Hunt, Graham)Loyola NR def. Northland Christian DL (Ditzian, Hodge, Castillo)Westlake DB def. Apple Valley PH (Ditzian, Castillo, Sullivan)Woodlands AC def. Peninsula JL  (Scoggin, Graham, Fife)Eastside Catholic TD def. Law Magnet DD (Baker, Knell, Harris P)Katy Taylor NY def. Calhoun Home AC (Roberts, Alderete, Gravley)Strake Jesuit JZ def. Harker KQ (Wei, Shivji, Popatia)Peninsula AT over Peninsula JZ Octafinals (bid)Peninsula AT def. Westwood SN (Castillo, Zhou, Wei)Greenhill BE def. Strake Jesuit JZ (Sharma, Yim, Zhou)Strake Jesuit AT def. Greenhill GB (Wei, Theis, Paramo)Peninsula AJ def. Katy Taylor NY (Roberts, Scoggin, Knell)Greenhill VA def. Woodlands AC (Knell, Fink, Popatia)Westlake DB def. Loyola NR (Gravley, Ditzian, Sharma)Eastside Catholic TD def. Dulles KS (Barnes, Wright, Harris P)Dulles NB def. Harvard-Westlake CC (Van Berg, Wright, Baker) QuarterfinalsPeninsula AT def. Dulles NB 2-1 (Castillo, Paramo*, McCoy)Peninsula AJ def. Greenhill BE 2-1 (Castillo, Paramo*, Rubaie)Greenhill VA def. Eastside Catholic TD 3-0 (Sharma, Fink, Wheeler)Strake Jesuit AT def. Westlake DB 2-1 (Sharma*, Boyer, Fink) SemifinalsPeninsula AT def. Strake Jesuit AT 3-0 (Roberts, Sharma, Boyer)Peninsula AJ def. Greenhill VA 3-0 (Fink, Rubaie, Yim) ChampionsPeninsula AT and Peninsula AJ (Arjun Tambe and Akhil Jalan) 

Varun Bhave Wins the 2014 New York City Invitational

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text] New York, NY - Congratulations to Del Mar's Varun Bhave for winning the 2014 New York City Invitational! In finals, Varun defeated Scarsdale's Rahul Gosain on a 5-0 decision. Congratulations to both debaters! Varun is coached by Marshall Thompson. Rahul is coached by Joe Vaughan, Daiya Massac, Mark Gorthey, and Chris Kymn. Bronx Science is an octafinals bid tournament to the Tournament of Champions. Congratulations to all debaters who bid this weekend! Speaker Awards1. Cypress Bay - Jake Steirn2. Sacred Heart - Adam Tomasi3. Newark Science - SunHee Simon4. University - David Branse5. Del Mar - Varun Bhave6. Brentwood - Jackson Lallas7. Lexington - Preetham Chippada8. Walt Whitman - Sophia Caldera9. Scarsdale - Rahul Gosain10. Hunter College - Sarah Cogan Double OctafinalsBrentwood MR vs Newark Science AF (Elisetty, Dunay, DeBois)Walt Whitman SCa vs Lake Highland RS (Legried, Traber, Prasad)Grapevine AY vs Brentwood JC (Traber, Koh, Tarsney)Oxbridge Academy of the Palm Beaches NV vs WDM Valley GS (Thaler, Cha, Natbony)George Washington CO DL vs Cypress Bay JS (Massey, Thaler, Amey)Lexington AS vs Hunter College SC (Reiter, Massey, Evnen)Scarsdale MB vs Lexington DA (Legried, Evnen, Thompsom)Lexington PC vs Harrison AG (Gorthey, Anderson, Kwan)Cypress Bay JI vs Newark Science SS (Biel, Ave, Scher)WDM Valley TG vs Kinkaid TG (Gorthey, Scher, Prasad)Brentwood JL vs University AF (Heizelman, Zhou, Zavislan)Byram Hills SC vs Brentwood JP (Zhou, DeBois, Cha)Del Mar Independent VB vs University JR (Massey, Millman, Koh)Ridge NP vs Scarsdale RG (Massey, Kwan, Zavislan)University DB vs Collegiate NE (Heizelman, Millman, Bone)Sacred Heart AT vs North Allegheny Senior GR (Massac, Struver, Hamilton) Octafinals (bid)Kinkaid TG def. Brentwood JL (Kwan, Amey, Elisetty)Sacred Heart AT def. Brentwood JC (Tarsney, Koh, Prasad)University DB def. WDM Valley GS (Natbony, Pregasen, Thaler)Scarsdale RG def. Lexington AS (Posner, Cha, Berruti '13)Cypress Bay JS def. Lexington DA (Gorthey, Massey, Berman)Newark Science AF def. Lexington PC (Warner, Ave, Massac)Newark Science SS def. Byram Hills SC (Thomas, Scher, Dunay)Del Mar Independent VB def. Walt Whitman SCa (Traber, Legried, Reiter) QuarterfinalsCypress Bay JS def. Kinkaid TG (Tyler Gamble) 3-0 (Cha, Kwan, Koh)Scarsdale RG def. University DB (David Branse) 2-1 (Massey, Prasad, Pregasen*)Del Mar Independent VB def. Newark Science AF (Adegoke Fakorede) 3-0 (Zavislan, Dunay, Biel)Sacred Heart AT def. Newark Science SS (SunHee Simon) 2-1 (Gorthey*, Scher, Berruti) SemifinalsScarsdale RG def. Sacred Heart AT (Adam Tomasi) 3-0 (Berman, Dunay '09, Prasad)Del Mar Independent VB def. Cypress Bay JS (Jake Steirn) 2-1 (Gorthey, Cha, Annex*) FinalsDel Mar Independent VB def. Scarsdale RG (Rahul Gosain) 5-0 (Berruti, Prasad, Zavislan, Heizelman, Kwan) ChampionDel Mar Independent VB (Varun Bhave) Pairings can be found on Tabroom: https://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/index.mhtml?tourn_id=2853 Brackethttps://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/results/bracket.mhtml?tourn_id=2853&result_id=5066 Prelim Records: https://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/results/ranked_list.mhtml?event_id=27355&tourn_id=2853[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

David Branse Wins the 2014 Bronx Round Robin

[vc_row][vc_column width="1/1"][vc_column_text] Congratulations to University's David Branse for winning the 2014 Bronx Round Robin. In finals, he defeated Sacred Heart's Adam Tomasi on a 3-2 decision. Congratulations to both debaters! David and Adam won their respective pods with records of 9-1 and 7-3. David is coached by Zach Prax, Tom Evnen, and Grant Reiter. Adam is coached by Jacob Nails. Speaker Awards1. Del Mar - Varun Bhave2. Newark Science - Sunhee Simon3. Lexington - Preetham Chippada4. Sacred Heart - Adam Tomasi5. Scarsdale - Rahul Gosain PodsThe Levinson™ Pod1. University School (FL) — David Branse, 9-12. Del Mar (CA) — Varun Bhave, 7-33. Walt Whitman High School (MD) – Sophia Caldera, 5-5 (won head-to-head)Grapevine High School (TX) — Alex YoakumNewark Science Park High School (NJ) — SunHee SimonThe Bronx High School of Science (NY) — Griffin Lee Miller The Elisetty™ Pod1. Sacred Heart High School (MA) — Adam Tomasi, 7-3 (on speaker points)2. Scarsdale High School (NY) – Rahul Gosain, 7-3 (won head-to-head)3. Kinkaid School (TX) — Tyler Gamble, 7-3Cypress Bay High School (FL) — Jake SteirnLexington High School (MA) — Preetham ChippadaWest Des Moines Valley High School (IA) – Gina Scorpiniti[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Varun Bhave Wins Voices

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]San Jose, CA - Congratulations to Del Mar's Varun Bhave for winning the 2014 Voices Invitational. In finals, Varun defeated Harvard-Westlake's Nick Steele on a 2-1 decision (Torson, DeLateur, Newkirk*). Congratulations to both debaters! The Voices Invitational is a quarterfinals bid qualifying tournament to the Tournament of Champions. About the Voices Foundation:Since 2005 the Voices Foundation has raised funds for the financially disadvantaged members of the LD debate community, primarily through its Round Robins and other efforts by the community. That money will go to help a record number of aid applicants attend summer debate institutes and tournaments during the year. We hope that you can join us for this tremendous event for the entire community. The Voices Foundation was established by a student-coach in an effort to make high school debate accessible to all students, regardless of financial circumstance. The Foundation strives to address shortfalls of resources and support that impede participation by financially disadvantaged individuals and teams through educational programs, outreach efforts to high schools and middle schools trying to start teams, and scholarships for summer camp, tournaments, and coaching. Find out more about the Voices Foundation here: http://voicesfoundation.org/index.html or https://www.facebook.com/voicesfoundation.org?ref=br_tfTo make a donation to the Voices Foundation: http://voicesfoundation.org/donate.html Pairings and results can be found on Tabroom: https://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/index.mhtml?tourn_id=2835 Congratulations to Harker's Pranav Reddy for winning top speaker.Speaker Awards

1. Harker – Pranav Reddy
2. John Marshall – David Dosch
3. Harvard-Westlake – Cameron Cohen
4. Del Mar/Torrey Pines – Varun Bhave
5. Lynbrook – Dhruv Walia
6. Mission San Jose – Anand Balaji
7. Harvard-Westlake – Nick Steele
8. Miramonte – Tom Kadie
9. Oakwood Secondary – Jack Wareham
10. Los Altos – James Naumovski

 Double OctafinalsMeadows MS def. Dougherty Valley SZLynbrook DW def. Dougherty Valley CRHarker KQ def. FSHA MCMission San Jose AB def. Oakwood Secondary AMHarvard-Westlake NS def. Immaculate Heart LMOakwood Secondary JW def. Peninsula JLLa Canada AZ def. Mountain View VPHarvard-Westlake CC def. Bainbridge CWMarlborough AG def. Palo Alto ALDel Mar VB def. Meadows ATJohn Marshall DD def. Peninsula KKMiramonte TK def. Crossroads NSDel Mar AI def. Evergreen KVPalo Alto AM def. Arbor View AADel Mar KB over Del Mar KKHarker PR over Harker SP OctafinalsMeadows MS def. Mission San Jose AB 3-0 (Fife, Jacobson, Pyda)Lynbrook DW def. Harvard-Westlake CC 2-1 (Carter, McHugh, Amestoy*)Harker KQ def. Palo Alto AM 2-1 (Harris*, Roberts, Sonnenberg)Harker PR def. Oakwood Secondary JW 3-0 (Kennedy, Knell, Wheeler)Harvard-Westlake NS def. La Canada AZ 3-0 (Chen, Torson, Alderete)John Marshall DD def. Del Mar KB 3-0 (Fink, Peiris, Placido)Del Mar VB def. Marlborough AG 3-0 (DeLateur, Hughes, Hunt)Del Mar AI def. Miramonte TK 2-1 (Ahn, Bistagne*, Leone) Quarterfinals (bid)Harker PR over Harker KQ (Karen Qi)Del Mar VB def. John Marshall DD (David Dosch) 3-0 (DeLateur, Placido, Torson)Harvard-Westlake NS def. Lynbrook DW (Dhruv Walia) 3-0 (Bistagne, Fink, Pyda)Meadows MS def. Del Mar AI (Ash Israni) 2-1 (Amestoy, Harris, Knell*) SemifinalsHarvard-Westlake NS def. Meadows MS (Melanie Shackleford) 3-0 (Newkirk, Pyda, Torson)Del Mar VB def. Harker PR (Pranav Reddy) 2-1 (DeLateur, Harris, Knell*) FinalsDel Mar VB (aff) def. Harvard-Westlake NS (Nick Steele) 2-1 (Torson, DeLateur, Newkirk*) ChampionDel Mar VB (Varun Bhave)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

David Branse Wins Crestian, Jake Steirn Wins the Crestian RR

[vc_row][vc_column width="1/1"][vc_column_text]

Weston, FL - Congratulations to University's David Branse for winning the second annual Crestian Tradition! In finals, David defeated LAMP's Ruchir Rastogi on a 3-0 decision (DeVore, Ave, Hymson). Congratulations to both debaters! David is coached by Zach Prax, Tom Evnen, and Grant Reiter. Ruchir is coached by Chris Colvin, Nitin Rastogi, and Grant Reiter. The Crestian Tradition is a quarterfinals bid qualifier tournament to the Tournament of Champions.

 Congratulations also to Jake Steirn for winning the Crestian Round Robin. In finals, Jake defeated University's Alejandro Frydman on a 2-1 decision (Ave, Jayaraman, Ditzian*). Jake is coached by Bob Overing, Grant Reiter, Robbie Steirn, and Megan West. Alejandro is coached by Zach Prax, Tom Evnen, and Grant Reiter.Congratulations to Grant Reiter for coaching the champions and finalists of both the round robin and regular tournament. Full results for the tournament can be found below and on Joy of Tournaments: http://www.joyoftournaments.com/fl/crestian-trad/info.asp OctafinalsUniversity JR def. Byram Hills JBr 3-0 (DeVore, Ditzian, Lonam)University DB def. Pembroke Pines YM 3-0 (DeVore, Ditzian, Ortega)Winter Springs JL def. Hawken NK 3-0 (Biel, Hymson, White)Lake Highland NK def. Byram Hills PE 3-0 (Hodge, Shatzkin, Ortega)Dowling CK def. Independent WY 3-0 (Ave, Jayaraman, Koh)LAMP RR def. Lake Highland SP 2-1 (Ave*, Jayaraman, Koh)University AF def. Lake Highland MC 3-0 (Biel, Hymson, White)University KC over University SK QuarterfinalsLake Highland NK def. University JR 2-1(Jayaraman, Shatzkin, White*)Winter Springs JL def. Dowling CK 2-1 (Ditzian, Hodge, Posner*)LAMP RR def. University AF 3-0 (DeVore, Hymson, Ave)University DB over University KC SemifinalsLAMP RR def. Winter Springs JL 2-1 (Ditzian, Hymson, Jayaraman*)University DB def. Lake Highland NK 3-0 (DeVore, Hodge, White) FinalsUniversity DB def. LAMP RR (Ruchir Rastogi) 3-0 (DeVore, Ave, Hymson) ChampionUniversity DB (David Branse)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Sean Fahey Wins the 2014 St. James Invitational

[vc_row][vc_column width="1/1"][vc_column_text]Montgomery, AL – Congratulations to Ben Franklin’s Sean Fahey for winning the 2014 St. James Invitational. In finals, he defeated Henry W. Grady's Logan Mann on a 2-1 decision. Congratulations to both debaters! The St. James tournament is a finals bid qualifying tournament to the Tournament of Champions. QuarterfinalsBen Franklin SF def. Henry W. Grady CDHenry W. Grady MF over Henry W. Grady GBVestavia Hills CS def. Henry W. Grady WTHenry W. Grady LM def. Vestavia Hills NP SemifinalsBen Franklin SF def. Henry W. Grady MFHenry W. Grady LM over Henry W. Grady WT FinalsBen Franklin SF (neg) def. Henry W. Grady LM (Logan Mann) 2-1 (Henderson*, Shields, Beachem) ChampionBen Franklin SF (Sean Fahey)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Harvard-Westlake Closes Out the 2014 Voices Round Robin

[vc_row][vc_column width="1/1"][vc_column_text] San Jose, CA - Congratulations to Harvard-Westlake's Cameron Cohen and Nick Steele for closing out the 2014 Voices Round Robin. Cameron and Nick won their respective pods after 5 rounds with records of 8-2 and 9-1, respectively. Congratulations also to Harker's Pranav Reddy for winning top speaker.Congratulations to Nick Steele for winning the Voices Educational Forum as well. Presentation Pod1. Harvard-Westlake - Nick Steele: 9 ballots2. Harker - Pranav Reddy: 7 ballots (on speaker points)3. Miramonte - Tom Kadie: 7 ballots Voices Pod1. Harvard-Westlake - Cameron Cohen: 8 ballots2. John Marshall - David Dosch: 7 ballots (on speaker points)3. Mission San Jose - Anand Balaji: 7 ballots Full pairings for the round robin can be found on Tabroom: https://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/index.mhtml?tourn_id=2835Stay tuned for live updates of the 2014 Voices Round Robin! The first four rounds will take place on Friday, with the fifth round on Saturday, along with the annual Educational Forum. UPDATE: There has been a slight adjustment of the speech times for the round robin.1AC - 6 minutes, 2 minute CX1NC - 7 minutes, 2 minute CX2AC - 5 minutes, 1 minute CX1NR - 6 minutes, 1 minute CX1AR - 3 minutes2NR - 4 minutes2AR - 3 minutes[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Bronx Round Robin Field Announced

Congratulations to the following debaters who will be participating at the Bronx Round Robin:

• Adam Tomasi (Sacred Heart)
• Tyler Gamble (Kinkaid)
• Rahul Gosain (Scarsdale)
• Griffin Lee Miller (Bronx)
• Preetham Chippada (Lexington)
• David Branse (University)
• SunHee Simon (Newark Science)
• Jake Steirn (Cypress Bay)
• Varun Bhave (Del Mar)
• Gina Scorpiniti (Valley)
• Sophia Caldera (Walt Whitman)
• Alex Yoakum (Grapevine)