[eDebate] Coalition of the list-supporter

Ede Warner ewarner
Sat Jun 3 20:38:19 CDT 2006

I'm only reading edebate for a couple of days, so I again admit
but is the community so polarized on the list vs non-list issue that
will determine the outcome of the voting, to the exclusion of any
consideration of what is included in the various lists?  Are people
to go with Ede, throw caution to the winds, and accept any list topic
the one area topic?  Are others ready to say they support any area
over any list topic, regardless of the area or the list.  I hear some
extreme voices on each side (on some days mine may be included,) but I
assume that most people fall somewhere in the middle, so that they will
fact put the First Amendment topic somewhere in the middle of their

Given the way the committee's voting process went down and the
reactions to my post, I'd say it's quite polarized. There have been at
least three posts already saying "lists too big, lists too big".  Now,
mind you, I've conceded that the topic might be taken to the margins in
some divisions by some debaters (although history says overrule with
decisions works pretty well).  I've also argued that some folks will
make this decision for other reasons, but yet, the threat of "the season
will be destroyed with the boundless lists topics should be the sole and
obvious determining factor for everyone who is competent in our game. 
Yeah, I'd call that polarized.  Look, just as Ms. Vats argued that all
the folks in law school thought overrule was a terrible choice, I'll
argue that many of the debate professionals who debated privacy thought
overrule worked out fine. Now perhaps, Will is right and things have
changed, but the question is what has changed to make the lists topics
so unworkable today?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20060603/e7410868/attachment.html 

More information about the Mailman mailing list