[eDebate] ans Warner and Stannard
Wed Jul 18 16:52:53 CDT 2007
MK: I didn't mean to minimize your research. Trying to get a handle on people's reasons for their decisions is a good idea. And even though I am skeptical about our ability to accomplish that and how far we can take the results, I wouldn't discourage the attempt.
MS: Yeah and that's not what people are doing in this conversation and you know that.
MK: But I think there is a plausible explanation of why folks wouldn't mention topics as a reason their programs left. Just like people wouldn't say "I just wasn't smart enough to win in policy debate" for simple psychological reasons, they wouldn't say "I moved my program because I didn't like the topics."
MS: No, one instance is an admission of stupidity, and the other is a dislike for topics. There's apparently no shame involved in slamming the topics, but none of those directors did so, and one even said list topics are good for small schools. I guess what discourages me is how all the self-proclaimed progressives on the topic issue are not really concerned with data about what people have really, like, actually, said...the voice of the other you know. Kind of how they're dismissive of other projects people do in this community to increase access. You've been quick to accuse your ideological enemies in the past of searching for data to support preordained conclusions. That's exactly what our colleagues are doing in this discussion but you are giving them a free pass. Heck, Marlow even ADMITTED he wasn't interested in data. Jackie's myopia is catching. And Marlow says the cooperative serves elites too without ever having sent students to the cooperative. Is this the crowd you want to climb in bed with just because you're all old Saluki friends?
MK: You are right that doesn't mean that anyone actually had that reason and i acknowledge that in my post.
MS: Thank you.
MK: And I agree that just having simpler resolutions and non-policy resolutions won't eliminate privilege, either life privilege or debate experience privilege. the argument I presented was that it would cut some of that privilege away. and there is the historical example of middle years CEDA: a lot more people and programs, in large measure because it was easier for them to compete, and resolutions were a part of that. And that is a good thing that it only gets at part of privilege: that leaves a lot for you and others to do still.
Just a suggestion that a non-policy resolution might be a good start. Maybe?
MS: A completely different debate involving a lot of assumptions that (a) nobody's come close to proving, and (b) people have unthinkingly and hurtfully ignored, cajoled and marginalized a lot of good people in the community who question this current crusade.
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!??
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman