[eDebate] NDT COMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS IN EVANSTON

Zompetti at aol.com Zompetti
Fri Apr 7 00:03:45 CDT 2006


 
In a message dated 4/6/2006 11:56:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
sharris at ku.edu writes:

If one  wanted to be technical this rule endorsing workers as researchers and 
argument  writers for the NDT could be read as inconsistent with the AFA Code 
of Ethics  which says that  "Forensics competitors are expected to do their 
own  research. a.     Persons other than competitor (undergraduate  students, 
graduate students, or instructors/coaches) are not to be charged  with the 
responsibility of doing a forensics competitor's research."  The  limited research 
exeption clause does not seem to authorize designating  work!
ers at the NDT.  


 
Actually, a technical reading of the AFA Code of Ethics permits the NDT  
committee to do precisely this type of action.  You quoted it  yourself:  
"Forensics competitors are expected to do their own research.  a.     Persons other 
than competitor (undergraduate students,  graduate students, or 
instructors/coaches) are not to be charged with the  responsibility of doing a forensics 
competitor's research."   The new  "rule" is an attempt at regulating this, at 
least at the NDT (since the  committee's jurisdiction does not exceed that 
tournament).
 
I am somewhat compelled by the arguments Lupo and others have made, but I  
think the argument that this is not in the purview of the NDT committee is a  
non-starter.
 
zomp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20060407/10352772/attachment.html 



More information about the Mailman mailing list