[eDebate] MPJ and Comments
Tue Nov 21 14:45:44 CST 2006
I never claimed a hidden cabal. The merger was clear and open. The "forces"
> I am talking about are wide open for everyone to see. That was, and is,
> schools and programs that have choosen an elitist and exclusionary form of
> "national debate tournament style" debate. That the NDT engaged in
> psychological jui jitsu, the mere acceptance of a "shared topic," was just
> the beginning. It was all out in the open and still is. MPJ just makes the
> elite debateers more exclusive, more elitist and more insular. So, here is
> my proof Josh, have small programs and regional programs diminished? I think
> so. Have the entry barriers for particpation in CEDA debate increased? I
> think so. Has policy debate become more obscure and out of touch with the
> average college student, and even students who participated in high school
> debate? I think so. There is no secret cabal. You are all out there in the
> open, for everyone to see. I happen to hold the opinion that there are a lot
> of problems with CEDA/NDT debate that the top programs just don't give a
> damn about. No need to make a conspiracy argument on my part.
JBH: Fair enough...I suspect we agree there are problems...but not what the
problems are or how to fix them. I find, as I have mentioned before, that
the decline of programs happened well before the merger....And that
contemporary trends havent exactly increased the fold....But yes, its a
smaller activity. What possible motive would I have for wanting a smaller
activity????? I dunno, I think we all try to help small programs. I think
its more than a bit irresponsible to just assume because we disagree that
anyonbe who disagrees is "pro the death of debate."
> I agree that MPJ was on the rise prior to the merger. But I also think it
> part of a disturbing trend that led to the merger. They are part and
> parcel of
> the same propblem--namely, major programs in CEDA wanting to be like the
> boys" in NDT, and the trend toward a "national circuit." Not blaming you
> for it
> Josh, just describing the trend.
JBH: Cool, not even sure I am pro MPJ as its currently practiced
> > Fourth, MPJ at national tournaments is probably a good idea. Having
> > times had to try to escape the triples/doubles mine field at CEDA
> > in thos good old days of 300 judges many of whom you had never seen
> > before...Let me tell you that I sure dont want debaters today to have to
> > lose their last debate EVER in front of someone they have NEVER seen and
> > have no idea how to debate in front of.
> That is something we disagree on.
JBH: Guess you liked those debates.....Not for me thanks. Just not the way
four years of hard work should play out.
> Ok. Is it ok to discuss some ideas prior to the business meetings?
JBH: Of course, no problem, sorry - wasnt at all upset with the discussion
of MPJ as a potential negative....The Balkanization argument is particularly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman