[eDebate] Geez - We have no method......

debate at ou.edu debate
Wed May 3 18:12:24 CDT 2006


I guess some people are telling me that it is okay to not reveal the method in which you create topics.

I invested much time (with Josh) discussing this issue last year, and the closest topic we got was topic #8.

There was a small movement for #8 and then this Post FROM A TOPIC COMMITTEE MEMBER

-----------------------------

I'd like to associate myself with all of Bill Newnam's remarks and 
apprehension concerning Resolution 8. I too have very grave 
reservations about its suitability for a season-long college topic. 

As Bill points out, its selection seems more likely to produce either 
(a) affirmatives with only a tangential or no relationship to the topic 
paper, or (b) ideas of very dubious debatability (derecognition or 
recognition of Taiwan). Those ideas may be worthy of including in a 
broader resolution, but the notion that the affirmative would be boxed 
in to take one of those approaches every round, all year, seems unduly 
constaining. 

It was added to the topic ballot at the last minute, based on 
approximately 15 minutes of deliberation (if that much), and with 
virtually no consideration of an affirmative case list. It was 
included, as best as I can tell, from a desire to have a simple 
"Taiwan-only" resolution. 

I urge strongly that you rank resolution #8 as low as possible, or not 
at all. 

---------------------------------------

I do not understand the desire to not reveal to everyone in the community your position on critical resolutional 
framing issues, especially when we have things like the above occur.

At least describe your model, even if it involes adding topics to the ballot at the last minute based on 
deliberation.

Obviously I will make no friends in Kansas City or with this post.  But this issue is important to me, and I 
promised and held to that promise I would not criticize your method, I just wanted to know what it is.

Please, for the sake of the community,  lets end the shadines, the "new rules", and the hidden methods of 
organizational workings and create a debatable topic that makes people want to debate.

I will still not criticize your method, and don't let JP's antics water down my message.  I hope those who have 
not responded are thinking about it, because the meeting will happen, and soon.

Peace,

Jackie











More information about the Mailman mailing list