[eDebate] Ledewitz terrorism link to Morrison

scottelliott at grandecom.net scottelliott
Thu Sep 7 11:10:18 CDT 2006


I have a question for Josh and others. Is this e-mail conversation between you
and Ledwitz going to now be used as "evidence" in a debate round? I saw another
post where a debater or coach wrote a note to another "expert," trying to scam,
er, "secure" a critical internal link card. if you are planning on using it as
a part of your case and/or defense of your case or disad, did you disclose that
your e-mail conversation would be used in a competitive academic debate in order
to help your team win tournaments? Sometimes people are more critical of the
questions posed when the person asking the question discloses ulterior motives.

Perhaps the precedent has already been set. But it seems to me that fishing for
cards via e-mail is very close to simply getting on a blog site and writing
your own cards.

I am sure I could goad a professor into agreeing with just about any link story
I wanted, especially if he was answering on the asusmption that I was just an
avid fan/student/scholar searching for "clarification" or the "logical
conclusion" of her argument--rather than some debater or coach desperately
trying to get a link card stretching Morrison into a nuke terrorism scenario.

I am just wondering about whether it is ethical for debaters and/or coaches to
go around securing cards from experts through the skillful use of questions.
It is one thing to obtain clarification for one's own education--it is quite
another to drive an author to a conclusion so that you can obtain a competitive
advantage in a debate round. It just seems a bit unethical and also dangerous.

Just wondering whether this is the new norm for securing evidence in college
debate.

Does posting on e-debate now count as a published source?

If it does, then please use the following quote as much as you want in debate
rounds:

"It is unethical to use as evidence to support one's case or arguments the
responses of experts to queries from debaters or debate coaches. The questions
posed are soliticting responses to further the competitive advantages over
other students and are tantamount to fabricating evidence. It is no different
than making up one's own website and writing whatever link story one needs to
win a debate round. Further, use of such solicited 'evidence' within college
debate rounds will eventually anger White Supremicist Groups in America; who
will then join with Russian Skinheads and German Neo-Nazis to secure a suitcase
nuclear weapon from the Russian-Lithuanian mafia and detonate the nuclear device
in New York City or the Port of Houston; triggering a mistaken retaliatory
strike by the U.S. against Islamic nations, triggering an all out nuclear war.
Each use of such solicited evidence pushes them closer to the brink of
detonating the nuclear device and causing the destruction of the planet. And,
to paraphrase Schell, because there impact is infinite, any risk of reading
such solicited evidence in a debate round outweighs the utility of reading such
evidence."

Scott








More information about the Mailman mailing list