[eDebate] Ballot effects

Massey, Jackie B. debate
Fri Dec 7 13:47:00 CST 2007

I think i explained my position.  But/for LD, there will be no novice divisions in our region.  I do not beleive that the reason we have a low novice turnout is because "many of us refuse to subject true novices to the suffering faced by some early this season and every season" -- i believe that people do not value novice debate, and it is easier to claim the rules are the problem than actually field novice teams.  That is why I made my pepsi challenge.  (see Massey's email"



From: Darren Elliott [delliott at kckcc.edu]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 12:09 PM
To: edebate at ndtceda.com; Massey, Jackie B.
Subject: Re: [eDebate] Ballot effects

I thought Neil's analysis was enough to convince you to vote for the amendment?  Why the change of heart?

His most recent numbers should've sealed the deal--unless you are someone who believes it is ok to stack novice with experienced debaters in the hopes of preserving it.  I just dont get that logic and maybe I am missing something.

Not trying to incite, but genuinely interested in the rationale.

My prediction..if it doesnt pass..the message it sends is load the division with experienced debaters and we are back to square zero.  Novice will never be as big in the Midwest as it is in the East as long as people will stack divisions.  Why?  Because many of us refuse to subject true novices to the suffering faced by some early this season and every season.  It's philosophical and maybe we'll never agree.  But in the absence of change, novice divisions in the midwest will barely survive.  Our numbers are pitiful.  Without the change, if we field novices, we'll leave the midwest and go to ada tournaments.  I will encourage others to do the same.  Without change, CEDA/NDT novice divisions West of the Appalachians will remain small.  Seems like the same may be true but on a different note in California (see Sue Peterson's email).


Darren Elliott
Director of Debate and Forensics--KCKCC

>>> "Massey, Jackie B." <debate at ou.edu> 12/07/07 10:37 AM >>>
Here is some prognostications.  (spell that right?)

If the novice eligibility ammendment passes, we will see more novice divisions collapsing into JV.

Why alter the chagning squo.....

We did not have one tournament this semester that had to collapse JV and Novice in our region.  IE I control uniqueness.

Now, when we start collapsing JV into Novice next semester because those who should be in novice are food for Experienced JVers, i might say i told you so.

Just my predictions.

I did not vote for the amendment.  I try really hard to help novice divisions. I have had at least two novice teams every year for the past ten years.
It doesnt seem like the utlimate results of such vigorous rules have been understand.  If it passes I am hoping I was wrong.


eDebate mailing list
eDebate at www.ndtceda.com

More information about the Mailman mailing list