[eDebate] Stopping the Snowball
Fri Aug 15 15:15:23 CDT 2008
hmmm cursing someone out like there is no tomorrow in front of a room full
of people is not acceptable behavior? I am talking about the two obvious
people involved and perhaps their schools. Teams suffer for the actions of
one or two of their players many times in team sports and in life.
As far as leaving them out to dry???? Are we to sacrifice all the other
programs that had nothing to do with this bad publicity and may not even
have been at the tourney out to dry and suffer because of these two hot
headed individuals? We need to send a message to our administrators, that
we do not think this is right and when these things happen, there are
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Kevin Sanchez <
let_the_american_empire_burn at hotmail.com> wrote:
> on hester's behalf...
> on my behalf...
> what darren surch proposes - a 2-year ban from c.e.d.a.-sanctioned events -
> isn't "damage control" : it's hanging participants out to dry.
> first, does "folks involved" include the fort hays and towson teams, who
> both debated civilly? does it include shanara reid-brinkley? what did she
> do wrong?
> following on josh hoe's distinction between "internal review" and "getting
> exorcised in the press", there's a big difference between when i call my
> brother a jerk and when someone outside the family does. likewise (and
> despite my criticisms on debate media), only we should be allowed to call
> shanahan a "bearded hillbilly lunatic" (...one of the youtube comments).
> in my opinion, the position should be this: what happened was a heated
> exchange - not a physical altercation - that occurred after - not during -
> academic debate round. it got slightly out-of-hand, as arguments sometimes
> do between people who care about what they're saying. but one minute of
> videotaped bombast doesn't invalidate a career dedicated to education. it's
> comical to most arm-chair viewers, and morally outrageous to a minority,
> yet the facts remain: no laws were broken; bill has since publicly copped
> to making a mistake; and most have newly acknowledged the importance
> of civility to frank discussions of racism.
> james roland already said what needed to be said, and he said it on the
> scene: "this is not the way in which we do our activity a service" (3:05s).
> now it's time to acknowledge the importance of solidarity: no firings, no
> bans, no one left behind. we also don't serve the activity by capitulating
> to external threats on its academic freedom. if there's no legal issue, you
> all should claim the right of self-government, of judging what is and isn't
> beyond the pale, and what will or won't be done about it. those decisions
> had been made to everyone's apparent satisfaction when this video turned
> up; to give in to the pressure of bad publicity now wouldn't punish the act
> - it'd punish the controversy, and solely to 'keep up appearances'. that's
> real slippery slope: that participants will begin to censor themselves
> those in charge are more interested in public appearances than defending
> a forum where it's still permissible to call b.s. bullshit.
> in reply to those who say the professors were 'acting like children', i
> grow up.
> Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How<http://www.windowslive.com/explore/messenger?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_yahoo_082008>
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman