Equity violations

I have spent a great deal of time over the past two terms judging school-level and novice debaters. As is frequently the case when dealing with novices, naivety and enthusiasm often combine to produce unintentional equity violations. School pupils are often the most adept at avoiding or picking up on potentially destructive mistakes, but ideologically excitable university-level debaters can often fall into the trap of making arguments or suggesting motions that have the potential to distort a debate or alienate other participants.

Egregious violations of an equity policy are best dealt with by approaching a tournament's equity officer, or a senior member of the offending debater's society. But how should more minor violations be addressed? Should they be discussed and examined in more detail when a judge gives the rational for his or her adjudication to the teams that took place in a round? Or should the issue be raised privately?