[eDebate] [CEDA-L] The 2 Worker rule.
Thu Apr 20 10:57:59 CDT 2006
Do you mean "not free to coach at all" or "not free to coach by
From: ceda-l-bounces at ndtceda.com [mailto:ceda-l-bounces at ndtceda.com] On
Behalf Of Joel Rollins
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 11:42 AM
To: William Newnam
Cc: ceda-l at ndtceda.com; Kevin Kuswa; Karla Leeper; Jean-Paul Lacy
Subject: Re: [CEDA-L] [eDebate] The 2 Worker rule.
my impression is that the judges you bring are not free to coach in
On Apr 20, 2006, at 9:22 AM, William Newnam wrote:
>> It is not a loophole, but it is the case that the judges you bring
>> free to coach/judge in any capacity.
> This is a very important comment. I have been under the impression
> that the
> rule meant that only two people could coach in the capacity of
> and writing arguments." I assume that Kevin was at the meeting
> where this
> rule was passed and has a better understanding than those of us not
> on the
> NDT committee.
> Could their be some official interpretation to claify. I thought
> from any
> give pool of coaches and judges that up to two people were allowed
> to cut
> cards and write arguments.
> What has concerned me is that coaches other than those two
> designated can
> write any ideas down for their students, edit or write counterplan
> copy and paste something from a website, mark something they read
> in the
> paper in the morning and hand it to their students. This
> that "the judges you bring are free to coach/judge in any capacity"
> is very
> could we have an official interpretation/response to this?
> bill n
> CEDA-L mailing list
> CEDA-L at ndtceda.com
CEDA-L mailing list
CEDA-L at ndtceda.com
More information about the Mailman