[eDebate] answers for TIm..

Josh jbhdb8
Tue Jul 17 09:07:08 CDT 2007

I do see the exodus....I dont want to put my head in the sand.....I am just
a) pretty sure no matter what we do programs arent coming back - they like
what they are doing (Parli etc)  b) that there is academic benefit to what
we do and how we do it - I love debate too and would hate to lose what I
think is most valuable about it on supposition and c) Am much more convinced
that money has more to do with the fall-off then topics (especially at the
high school level).

Your question is a good one in this sense....Should we change what we do in
order to become bigger or at least to remain the same size.  Tim's response
is also important because if we changed everything based on your
"connections" and the fall off continued what was the value of the changes?

Anyway, maybe you are Al Gore and Tim and I are Bush and Cheney and we are
having a discussion about Global Warming.....BUT, I do know there are 1000s
of high school debaters and lots of college programs still chugging right
along.  I personally think the lack of release time and pay for debate
coaches combined with length of schedule and intensity of the schedule burns
a TON of coaches out.....Not sure how to fix that really,


On 7/17/07, debate at ou.edu <debate at ou.edu> wrote:
> Josh,
> Do you know what totalizing means?
> It would be saying something like "resolutions have NOTHING to do with
> teams leaving the activity.
> Are you in neglect also josh.  Do you not see the exodus?
> Respect!  (Beanie Man)
> Massey
> > Let me give a hand to Tim,
> >
> > Pace (one of the two programs) still debates and debates Policy,
> > Travis Neal
> > is the Director..  Notre Dame had money problems even when Tim was
> > there and
> > still dabbles in policy (they hosted a tournament in our district even
> > a
> > year ago).
> >
> > I cant really believe your response to Tim's post was:
> >
> > "I dont need evidence to draw the connections, and you sound absurd
> saying
> > there is no connnection."
> >
> > I guess you are right in that many of us dont want to be coaches in an
> > activity where balancing Aff and Neg ground is "the start of the
> problem"
> > and we "dont need evidence" to make totalizing claims about the
> activity.
> >
> > I do mean that with respect,
> >
> > Josh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070717/e3d79b11/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list