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

Jean-Paul Lacy lacyjp
Thu May 4 08:24:01 CDT 2006


Your best argument is "It doesn't matter, I'm not on the topic committee???"
{Lots of people think that way, in fact I'm incredibly guilty myself.}
Your question has been asked and answered. It matters that your are 
interested *to the committee.* Check Bear's posts in the archive about how 
a non-member can make a huge contribution.



"My views were ignored last year" by the topic committee because your 
arguments were bad.
Make good arguments and you won't be ignored.



I have *definitely* tried to have this conversation with you back-channel 
on several occasions. You've ignored me every time I've tried to talk about 
this.
I remember explicitly asking you in a back-channel message "given that its 
courts next year, what can we do to alleviate your [china topic] concerns?"

Response?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
[Large blank spot.]

Every public email asking you "what do you want for a 
topic?".......nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Now we get "JP can kiss my @$$."

         {Which is a response I encounter quite often--often justified. 
Given the circumstances, (You want the topic wording to be "substantially 
different than last years.") I don't think
         asking for an alternative method of writing the topic is out of line.}


That is why I have repeatedly asked you "How would you write the topic?"

And the question remains....unanswered.

All we've got from you is:

         The USFG should substantially change the power of the president.
         The US Supreme Court should substantially change one or more of its
         decisions.
         The USFG should substantially change its IP law.



--JP Lacy

ps--I *really* just want to know. If I decide to write wordings during the 
proceedings, I need your point of view.

pps--I wish I could "show my face" in KC so I could "hear it from you." 
I'll be a virtual participant again this year. If the past proves true 
again, the committee will respond well to community input. If you want to 
change that input, then make good arguments.




At 08:04 AM 5/4/2006, debate at ou.edu wrote:


>JP can kiss my @$$.
>
>We could have this discussion in the backchannel he refuses.
>
>I will remind him again, I am not on the topic committee, so it does not 
>matter.  I expressed my views last year
>and it did not matter. SO shut up please!
>
>My question to you is am i on the topic committee?
>
>NO
>
>Are you?  I hope not!
>
>I wont respond to such dipshitedness anymore.  This is exactly what I was 
>talking about.
>
>Show your face in Kansas City, you will hear plenty from me.
>
>massey
>
>
>
>
> > These are not antics, I just want to know what *your* method for
> > writing
> > and selecting a topic is. Maybe it will help in Kansas City.
> >
> > (Otherwise, we will end up with topics like #8 last year. Jackie, I
> > remember you supporting it. If others understood why, then maybe
> > the topic
> > might have garnered more support...)
> >
> > (And yes, it matters even if we aren't on the committee...they seek
> > as much
> > input as they can.)
> >
> >
> > So, my question stands: What are you looking for in a topic? How do
> > you
> > want to get there?
> >
> >
> > This is as far as we've got:
> >
> > Using your methods (as far as you've described them,) I've written
> > 3
> > resolutions for next year:
> > The USFG should substantially change the power of the president.
> > The US Supreme Court should substantially change one or more of its
> > decisions.The USFG should substantially change its IP law.
> >
> > Is this what you mean?
> >
> > If not, what do you mean?
> >
> > --JP Lacy
> > lacyjp at wfu.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >





More information about the Mailman mailing list