[eDebate] ans Stannard

Josh jbhdb8
Wed Jul 18 19:56:32 CDT 2007


Hey,

I feel the pain of all the broad topic people, and I even suggested last
year that maybe it was time for a broader topic.  Hell, I didnt like the
USFG should substantially change its policy towards Mexico...But my teams
debated it.....I hated two topics a year....But I still spent XMas
researching....However, I cant just let this NON POLICY RES stuff slide:


> Mike:  I am unsure of what your answer here is.  I think a number of folks
> are arguing that we should try a non-policy resolution.  Something big and
> broad.   So I am unsure why you think this is a different debate... I think
> that will cut against at least some of the privilege that policy debate
> experienced students and programs have over novices, those who didn't
> compete on the national circuit in high school, and even those who only
> sorta learned to debate that way.  It will also cut against some of the
> advantages that long-time policy programs have over those that can't recruit
> as aggressively, don't have 1st round coaches, and so on.  Because they
> won't be the same sort of resolutions that those folks are great at.  That's
> a fairly simple argument without a lot assumptions...  True, it hasn't been
> proven but not much of life is.
>

I think this is just NOT true,

1. It doesnt take that much time or  smarts to figure out that:

a) non-policy topics have "policy implications"
b) criteria functions a bit like K frameworks
c) Whole res/Hasty G has some issues

I am really skeptical that somehow, if a non-policy resolution passed it
would change things substantially....On my second non-policy topic ever I
won CEDA nationals...Again, I had GREAT help from CEDA veterans...But its
not brain surgery.  I know the mere threat of a non-policy resolution almost
squashed the evil merger...But its really not that different...Certainly not
enough so that good coaches in the "policy" world will suddenly become
helpless and old school CEDA coaches will take over the corridors of
national circuit power.

2. CEDA membership was massively falling off PRIOR to the MERGER.  I keep
saying this and nobody even bothers to respond.  There was an elite
hierarchy of teams winning EVERY tournament, tournaments were dropping in
numbers, CEDA nats was massively dropping in numbers (unless it was hosted
in Cali).  My senior year there were five teams that everyone would have
agreed had a chance at winning CEDA nationals.  This nostalgia is
AHISTORIC.

I feel your pain, I really do....I love Marlow and Massey....I really do,
but its not going back to the glorious past....Its really not.

Now, all that said, if a broader topic means some more kids debate....and we
get some different perspectives....Great....But non-policy topics?  Really?
They kind of stunk...and they sure arent going to rearrange the power in
this activity.

Again, with all respect, I totally get how frustrated some people seem in
this discussion,

Josh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070718/51a80877/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list