[eDebate] Does a CEDA Debate Calender really exist? Reply to Patrice

NEIL BERCH berchnorto
Wed Aug 29 12:01:14 CDT 2007


Joe--To me, that sounds like the most efficient solution.  As you know, I 
think Bruschke is god, and the site saves tournament directors hours to 
dozens of hours of work per tournament.  That said, there are some 
tournament directors who don't like using it and still run pretty efficient 
tournaments (Kentucky and Vermont come to mind).  Before we move to making 
the Bruschke site the sole sanctioning mechanism as well (as I'm sure you 
know, it already is an available mechanism; all you need to do is click a 
box on the last setup screen), I think we should find out why that is the 
case and address whatever concerns may exist.--Neil

--Neil Berch
West Virginia University


>From: "Joe Patrice" <joepatrice at gmail.com>
>To: edebate at www.ndtceda.com
>Subject: [eDebate] Does a CEDA Debate Calender really exist? Reply to 
>Patrice
>Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:58:47 -0400
>
>I completely agree but I'm actually inclined to go the other direction -- I
>think we should phase out the stand-alone tournament sanctioning form and
>streamline everything through a link to the Bruschke site.  Tournament
>directors should face fewer hurdles.  You set up the tournament on Bruschke
>and that is the mechanism for sanctioning and entries.
>
>Joe


>_______________________________________________
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate





More information about the Mailman mailing list