[eDebate] Um...Topicality still sucks

Donald Bryson anabaptist
Fri Jun 1 08:41:52 CDT 2007


1) Yes, I agree that the fact that debaters are taught to run some sort of T violation in every round is absolutely ridiculous.

2) Not every T argument is run for the sake of being a time suck.  What if I'm trying to double-bind into a link?

3) You've become a moving target.  First you said that topicality isn't a word, now your arg is that it isn't "mainstream."  Lundberg answered your argument that it wasn't a word, that's all.

3a) There's no impact to this argument.
3b) It's tantamount to saying that words that we don't use everyday shouldn't ever be used.  The word "bombastic" isn't used daily by most people, however people still know what it means and it accurately describes your argument.

4) Creative Topicalities are destroyed.  I know that a lot of people think that T violations such as "Oil isn't a fossil fuel" or (as Joe Bellon told me about) "Your nation is in Africa but it isn't AFRICAN."  These arguments may be bunk or they may not be.  However, they do expose us to literature that we would not otherwise be exposed to.  Knowledge is good.

5) I don't think the topic choices are that bad.  You disagree, fine.  Yelling and screaming about it on eDebate isn't doing a damn thing.  Do you seriously expect another topic committee meeting?  That's unrealistic.  Stop crying over spilled milk.  Complaining about current topic choices and complaining/trying to find a way to change the topic choice process are two different things.  Pick one.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070601/48f1a6c7/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list