[eDebate] ans to Korkock

scottelliott at grandecom.net scottelliott
Sat Oct 13 19:47:51 CDT 2007


Mike,

Given the subjectivity of debate judges paradigms, "pandering" is pretty much
part of the game. If I knew that a mime routine in which we acted out a nuclear
war causing the death of all humans and the blossoming of new species ("the
Flower"-Quick Bob Fossie hands to the face move!), with an eep ecology
overview--would mean winning a semi-finals round, we'd do it. The only
difference between that and a "strong-policy" round would be that we read ten
extra cards on why humans are aconcer on Mother Earth. Not pandering, Mike,
adapting our original arguments to appeal to the judge's aesthetic. Because,
unfortunately, policy debate has become for a question of appealing to a judges
tastes, than a true contest of actions that should be taken to make the world a
better place.

So, I guess I do teach a form of pandering to the audience. But MPJ allows
debaters and coaches to point blank EXCLUDE audiences from their debates. (A
CENTRAL POINT FOLKS!) I get to say "screw Andy and his hip-hop bullshit, fromt
he confort of my keyboard, and he has no opportunity to interact with my team
because we rank him as a C- judge, and Gary's programs virtually guarantee that
we will not have C-rated judges evaluate my teams.

For the record, we would probably put KORCOCK AND ELLIS as A-judges. Because I
think we have a strat that would appeal to either one of you. We carry a boom
box with 2-live-Crew remixes with us just in case. Andy, you should hear our
Zydeco/Cajun Culture turns (not a joke).

Another old dinosaur telling the whipper snappers how things ought to be.






More information about the Mailman mailing list