[eDebate] TOPIC ANARCHY....

Andy Ellis andy.edebate
Thu Jun 21 18:07:44 CDT 2007


On 6/21/07, matt stannard <stannardmatt at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> >>>
> 1) I believe the democratic order is unjust not non existent
> >>>
>
> Why, precisely, is it unjust?  Is this unjust-ness an intrinsic part of
> the concept of having topic committees and resolutions, or could it be
> reformed while still having a unitary resolution?
>
>
I am growing weary of this conversation, i know people dont want to read all
that i write and that everybody has time constraints on them(myself
included), but my argument has been relatively specific to the trend in
resolutional framing that makes "good debates" but not topics that provide
a  valuable  content based learning experience for students that are not
interested in carrerrs in federal government  policy making, im not
suggesting that there are no benefits from debate or advocacy or testing
arguments but that when ross says the skills we learn are not really
connected to the things we debate about i think that creates an unjust
democratic situation that would rather err on the side of "good Debate
topics" as opposed to "good topics for political debate" i dont think the
trend in specialization in topics provides what many of the students i work
with need for their political development and educational development and
while i know you disagree with this argument matt, i have made it several
times...enough that we can hash out what we agree on and disagree on at
least...i think there can be reforms and would like to work to make those
reforms through the topic process, i regret that i was unable to make the
topic meeting this year, and that i dindt provide a topic paper for abolish
prisons (though the questions i asked gordon about the paper where largely
promised to be answered but never actually engaged) but while i work to make
reforms i will also work to create alternatives...i dont think it is
intrinsically related to topics or committees or anything like that.....


>>>
> 2) I am saying that if the aff can prove their alternative RESOLUTION
> better they should get to win.
> >>>
>
> Would you accept the same process with time limits in the debate
>
>

Sure, if the aff makes an argument about why they get to go for 20 minutes
in the 1ac and 2 minutes for the rest of the speeches and the neg either
agrees or  loses the argument about why thats bad  then i would  probably
vote on that...i dont think its an easy argument to make nor  do i think
that negs should lose this debate but if thats how it happened in debates
then so be it...similarly i dont think wipeout or malthus are very good
arguments but if the neg doesnt think they bad or cant effectively point out
why they are bad then im no longer seeing myself as a critic who would
impose my desires on that debate

mjs
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Live Earth is coming.  Learn more about the hottest summer event - only on
> MSN. Check it out!<http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthwlm>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070621/ca9a4b08/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list