Thinking of things like https://www.thefp.com/p/judges-ruin-high-school-debate-tournaments https://benthams.substack.com/p/phenomenal-conservatism-vs-words https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-debate-community-replied-to-me https://controlledopposition.substack.com/p/the-national-debate-tournament-as

Resolves to PROB of my confidence (so if I'm not fully convinced but a bit more doubtful you can double your money). Closer to YES is 'matthew/freepress's account is incorrect/overstated/true but the behavior of the woke debaters is good', closer to NO is 'is matthew/freepress is correct/the debater's conduct is bad'.

My current prob will be 5%, the debaters' conduct seems dumb. I haven't looked into it more than reading those articles (and observing the ... curious ... responses of the other debaters to matthew on twitter, which are entirely consistent with the articles).

Note this has nothing to do with 'are progressive ideas good' or even 'is communism good / is capitalism bad', it's just about both: are the accounts accurate, and are the actions described bad / improper. The more incorrect I believe the accounts are / good the behavior described is, the higher this resolves!

Again, this isn't about 'am i right wing or left wing'. It is entirely possible, and in fact extremely common, to defend good ideas in counterproductive and insane ways! Also Free Press has plenty of other (whatever your political orientation) dumb articles, not about that either.

Closes in a month