Talk:Chief Adjudication Personnel

''The following are comments made on the original paper draft of the Chief Adjudicator's Handbook. Please feel free to add to them where appropriate.'' martpol 18:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Trevor Sather

"The issues here are sharing experience and international insight – obviously a good thing – but also one of perception by the WSDC community. In 2003 the CA’s team was criticised as being ‘cliquey’ – when in fact it involved more people, from more countries, in the decision-making process than had ever happened before, and was a deliberate attempt to move away from the autocracy of a single Chief Adjudicator.  But perception is a problem in itself.  The response to form a CAP in 2004 with even more people from a wider geographical spread seemed to work well.  Even if, ultimately, the CA is going to make the final call on an issue, as s/he must, then the community can be reassured that a number of different views have been aired in the prior discussion."

On the Motions Committee: "There has been some debate about who should set motions in the past. On the one hand, motion setting is a debating matter, and falls naturally on the side of the CA’s duties as they have evolved.  On the other hand, some Convenors like to be involved and to get the ‘intellectual satisfaction’ of setting topics.  My personal suggestion would be that the CA chairs the Committee, as the person in charge of debating matters, but that the Convenor is included if they wish."

Claire Ryan

"What is also important is that the CAP works collaboratively together and that it is not merely a figurehead group which plays no part in the Championships apart from its name or exists merely as a rubber stamp for the CA’s decisions. The CA should consult with the CAP prior to and during the Championship. The CA at Stuttgart 2004 was a facilitator who actively sought the views of the CAP before making decisions. Even when the CAP was not always in agreement and the final decision had to be made by the CA, as is required by the rules, the debating community as Trevor notes could be assured that a number of different viewpoints from different parts of the world had been considered.

Furthermore, it is important for the CA to know as soon as possible whether the Org Comm will be able to provide logistical, clerical and tabulation support and back up. If not, the CA will need to consider selecting a member or members of CAP with knowledge of data entry, tabulation and excel. If the CAP has already been selected when it is discovered that such support is not available from the Org Comm, then the CA may need to co-opt someone with those skills, as occurred in 2007."