[eDebate] A few questions about the constitution
Sat Jul 21 01:28:47 CDT 2007
Several people have told me that a ceda sanctioned tournament can offer
subsets of the topic(area), i think this is a myth. The constitutions doesnt
support this it says the following
In the Tournament Sanctioning section
Section 5: Individual tournament directors may modify time limits or use
variants of cross
examination and determine which CEDA division(s) (e.g. open, junior, novice,
etc.) and other
experimental divisions using the CEDA topics and may allow as many teams per
school to enter
their CEDA divisions as they wish. The tournament is obligated to use the
topics for the tournament and to follow divisional rules where applicable..
Other than this making the current topic look elegant, it seems to indicate
1) This clause has not been amended since the non policy language was
removed from the topic selection part of the constitution and korcok might
just have an in.
2)You must use the ceda topic(s) to be sanctioned.
So does the myth i reference above simply come from a time past or am i the
only crazy person who thinks some people have been telling me that
Second. There is a constitutional provison for issues and advocates
Issues and Advocates is the official electronic journal of the Association.
Its purpose is to serve
as a vehicle for bringing the student-produced work on a given topic to a
wider audience. The
electronic journal will invite submissions from the intercollegiate debate
community of cases,
briefs, and other prepared arguments on the CEDA debate resolution for the
purpose of making
public advocacy materials available public agencies, non-governmental
organizations, and other
interested organizations and individuals seeking synioptic research and
strategies in areas related to the national debate resolution.
Has an issue been released?
a web search for issues and advocates turns up the following
http://issuesandadvocates.com/ (is this us?)
and a bunch of other things that indicate where we got the term, but nothing
about the journal, it seems like instead of trying to shoot for journal, we
could instead aim to create some sort of web publication with slightly less
stringent publication standards and come much closer to acheiving the goal
of this constitutional provision, i also dont per se think the resource
should be geared toward policy makers as much as it is the debating public,
the teachers who want to use debate in their classroom, the community
advocates who want to put on a public debate, thats not exclusive of the
public agencies and ngos, but it should perhaps be the primary focus.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman