[eDebate] Coaltion of the list-supporter

V I Keenan vikeenan
Sat Jun 3 17:27:24 CDT 2006


maybe I just key into the word "Coaltion" . . .

I stated twice at the topic committee meeting that having one are may
be problematic for the very reason that Ede states - it coalesces all
of the votes on that choice.  This is not what I was aiming for.  One
of the reasons I suggested the theme list compromises so frequently
was a shorter way to essentially put another competing version of area
up; it's also why I looked for an education wording for an area and
that I did some work on free exercise of religion as a res area.  The
end issue is one of TIME - we didn't have it at the meeting, for
whatever reason, to create an appropropriate option to check against
this (like we did with non-Casey, and non-Quirin lists).

I still think the lists are HUGE.  the overrules affect other cases
making advantage areas unpredictable and spreading out the breadth of
lit research.  But I also think if you are generically pro-area, to
consider the actually res, not just that it is an area.

The time issue is why I support reform for the way the topic committee
is done and how papers are submitted - it does not necessarily in its
current form lead to the best choices.

-VIK

-- 
Baruch Debate, CUNY
Assoc. Director - New York Coalition of Colleges
212/992-9641 or 347/683-6894





More information about the Mailman mailing list