[eDebate] Loons

New Strega donnieoutofhiselement
Sat Apr 25 01:33:35 CDT 2009

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:27 PM, Nicole <nicole.colston at uvm.edu> wrote:

> who are you?  i am one of those participants you say makes up debate.
> my lifestyle is not really the point or up for debate, but i sincerely
> hope you got a good laugh with your friends.  miserly people need to
> smile too, thats what I always say.
> the indict of camp is very weak. . .especially the only actual
> argument about needing an exact topic wording.  you seem to be the one
> failing to paying attention.  where do you teach? could you possibly
> be a teacher?
> it seems we share an interest in culture-jamming, but i wouldn't
> really ever want others to know i actually read your posts. . .  i
> just wanted to suggest some anger counseling (or maybe even some
> prescribed drugs) because what I say shouldn't mean soooooooo much to
> you.
> good luck with all your fun and games

You asked for it.

ill start with the private reply before i answer the public post.

its probably problematic to champion epistemological concerns and then claim
that your lifestyle is not up for debate. Without a topic to focus our
discussion around and if the personal really is political then shouldn't we
be allowed to question all that goes into advocacy--- western thought,
positions of privilege and lifestyle included? its no secret that you are a
huge pothead,  I've never even spoken to you and i know that to be the
case---shouldn't the stuff you say be  filtered through that lens? Mind you
I'm not passing judgment on the lifestyle choice that you have made(and done
so with such conviction) merely stating that it might account for the flaws
in your arguments and be a reason why thinking people should disregard your
input. I'm not  even suggesting that everyone who commits so fervently to
the white rasta credo or who regularly partakes of Jah herb should be
disregarded on face, some very brilliant people are "heads", I'm merely
suggesting that you are not one of them.

Miserly means "of, relating to the characteristics of a miser."  A
*miser*is a person who is reluctant to spend
money <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money>, sometimes to the point of
forgoing even basic comforts. i am not stingy, nor do i forgo basic comforts
for my own personal financial gain. I think that is what your camp does tho,
odd how that works. I, my stoned little friend, am a hater. A hater is some
who engages in "hating". Hating, the result of being a hater, is not exactly
jealousy. The hater doesn't really want to be the person he or she hates,
rather the hater wants to knock someone else down a notch.  I think you were
trying to call me miserable---and that's fine and maybe that's true---
doesn't seem all that relevant in a world where i make many arguments that
go unanswered--- if you really want "miserly" people to be happy maybe you
should try answering an argument or two---debate makes me happy--- crushing
you so very badly like this, while it will entertain me for a spell will get
boring rather quickly i suspect.

The arg on the camp is weak is it? So indicting the entirety of your
approach to the problem of  difference in debate doesn't apply to your
little camp?

I guess ill address the camp more directly here:

 Let me get this straight-- you want 15 people to pay
$750.00($11,250.00 total ) to spend 10 days in the woods with NO Internet,
no topic to research,  listening to a whose who of debates degenerate
crowd blather on about the the trees and shit?
This is the worst idea i have ever heard and is transparently a scam
to give Jackie and His hippy girlfriend  a means to do next to nothing this
summer. Think about it--food for 20 people for 10 days cant be more than 2
grand(and that's assuming you went out everyday, oh wait you are camping in
a rundown hotel that probably doens't have electricity) so that means you'll
buy in bulk and spend a grand tops. That brings the total down to 10,
250. The fellows or scholars(if we could call them that considering this is
the least scholarly "camp" in history) can't be making more than 500 a piece
so that's 1500 which brings us down to 8,750 then you pay Nader and Toni
bucks a piece(how the two of you got suckered into this i will never know...
guess times really are tough) which leaves Jackie and Nicole with a cool
6,750 for ten days "work". They aren't paying for the facilities, not paying
for the insurance that they should most certainly have(i mean say nick watts
gets bit by a rattle snake and the indigenous knowledge that everyone
assumes is legit turns out to be bullshit and the medicine wheel made from
blunt wrappers doesn't do jack) its lawsuit time. If you really cared about
building community and all that jazz it would be done as a  co-operative(I'm
assuming Jackie, at least,  would be smart enough to advertise that if it
were the case) and not just way for Jackie and Nicole to exploit those who
cant see the forest for the trees.

And lets be clear here, by "work" we all know were actually talking about---
camping in a house that time is quickly forgetting, smoking more weed than
should be humanly possible and filling young minds whose stupid parents
sent them to Jackie and the Loon camp  with half truths and inflated
visa vie the evils of "traditional" debate.

i digress let me address the brochure proper:

"its all about bringing together college student and coaches interested in
alternative debate styles"

"alternative debate styles" assumes that there is such a thing as
traditional debate styles and in doing so over determines what "traditional"
debate is. Many of the teams that perpetuate critiques of traditional debate
are quickly finding out that its getting easier and easier to wiggle out of
this link precisely because debate(and the vast array of styles deployed by
its participants) is not some monolithic hegemonic force to make war on
but a collection of individuals all doing different things for different
reasons.  If the divide between traditional/non traditional is a false
one(which it obviously is) then calling one form of debate alternative
perpetuates this problem as much, if not more than,  those who just do what
they like because they like it.

"Join us in celebration of alternative debate education! Enjoy canoeing,
hiking, campfires, and great food amidst the solitude of the Adirondack

There is no internal link between the first half of this statement and the
second. What in gods name does a camping trip have to do with Debate? and
why does it cost 750 dollars? Most everyone lives within 50 miles of place
to go camping... and could do it for much less money and not have to
participate in Jackie and Nicole's pseudo-debate oriented, weed habit
supporting, bad argument perpetuating, shenanigans.

"bring your authors, and thier books"

Um yeah i called Zizek he said this was some bullshit and he ain't coming.

"The CALL OF THE LOON institute utilizes critical theory and pedagogy as a
tool for alternative debate education and intellectual community building.
Reasonably-priced program accommodations blend nature?s beauty with
experienced instructors and family-style accommodations."

Um really, i mean really, Nicole Colston is an idiot, Jackie Massey is a
crazy fucker, Toni is well, qualified, Nadar is gonna hate this cuz he's
urban as fuck, Nick is again qualified which makes me think he's being
blackmailed and Chris is well, Chris. oh yeah Marnie... awwww Marnie. is the
no booze policy cuz she's not old enough to drink or because Jackie kills
people when he's ties one on?
Again this brings up the question of what "alternative" debate education is?
alternative to what? the best part about debate is that ANYTHING can be
utilized and deployed by it's pedagogy. This links to all the arguments i
made before that went unanswered about needing to position yourself outside
so that you have something to debate about,  you know the part where i
called you a stupid coward.

Oh Wait!!!! the topic isn't out yet so the possible topics of conversation
are as follows: Heidegger, Indians, Nietzsche, Spanos(spurlock is there
forget), a terribly  misinformed eco-fem perspective, maybe some critical
pedagogy(tho that is quickly falling out of fashion), and maybe something
about why war is bad(  in case nukes or Russia become likely ). Save your
money, go to the library, take the books you get there to Burning Man, read
them and smoke reefer there. I bet i just saved you 400 bucks.

I  really wonder if there will be spirit walks and shit, some peyote maybe,
Jackie will gather everyone around and tell ghost stories about the time
immemorial before giving back the land was a viable strategy(its really not,
you all have been tricked)...  Bottom line is that this is a stupid idea and
if you go to this camp you are fucking stupid a probably deserve to get
bitten by a rattlesnake (or at the very least get Lyme's disease)and have to
sue the hippies that brought you there when your leg gets amputated.


ALL of this still links. you havn't provided a single warrant as to why what
you are suggesting isn't already happening or answered the crux of
"traditional Topics are BEST for everyone" claims.  ill apply my argument
specifically here:

1) a topic worded to provide positive ground for
the identity politics debate on both sides,

WRONG!!!!! the reason why teams win UNIQUENESS with these arguments is
because the topic ignores their particular standpoint---(classic example is
when a team is critiquing the institution of debate cuz it perpetuates some
big evil linear disad, they win U cuz its doing that.  A topic that didn't
link to that would make all of the ID teams business non-unique. "Debate is
already solving for X in the squo" is a common argument but not a very
convincing one until we adopt a topic that DOES something like that--- this
also applies to all of your agency claims.) The impact of this is taking
strategic viability away from the teams who K the topic.  A good interp of
functional  K ground on the Aff should be "getting to K the topic or
debate".  The aff that disregards the topic or relates to it in some
tangential roundabout way in the service of identity should get to say "you
saying our aff is unpredictable/unfair/ cheating  is a reason why it is
needed". Also there is a problem of practicality---one can't construct a
topic that accounts for diversity---the very notion that one could craft a
topic that "accounts for diversity" is antithetical to the notion of
"difference" and denies "alterity" cuz it positions "the other" as something
to be accounted for or managed instead of something that can never be known
and must be left "wholly other". This is basically the internal warrant for
the argument i made earlier(that you failed to answer) about why
incorporation and inclusion is usurpacious and co-optive.

2) for the rez to access a
meaningful and real-world point of change,

This isn't explained, those are vacuous buzz words that i suspect you have
heard much smarter people say a half dozen times and are now trying to use
to make yourself feel better about being differently able. Without
explanation this is also non-unique-- the res does that in the squo as much
as any alternatives to it would--  if you don't want the USFG to be in the
res then say that and get crushed like the other people who said that did--
The fundamental problem with this claim is that even if the res said that
"we should all take to the streets and fight the man" or something to that
effect it wouldn't be any more real world than any other res. And it would
only produce slightly different debates than the ones happening in the
squo.  The question of whether we position the state as primary actor or
reactor is largely immaterial.  Teams good at running policy oriented plans
would still be good at that.  Teams good at impact turning t would still be
good at that--- teams good at link turning the K and ignoring the res would
still be good at that. The agency claims are always going to be problematic
because debate are always going to be about what we should do and talking is
different than acting--- the only "agency" that any one can deploy in the
debate round to change anything "material" is through the choices they make
when they interpret the res. If the res is about itself(which is what it
would have to be) then it become even less about the real world and more
like a bird flying up its own ass.

3)to consider the authors
which have dominated our critical literature in our verbage

Do you think about things before you say them or do just string words
together and hope that a sentence comes out--- again no idea what this looks
like or why it links to "traditional" debate or why you get away with over
determining "traditional" debate or essentilizing it even if you do have a
link--- in short, these are concerns that are not the job and should not be
the job of the resolution--- You should have spent a few more years in JV.

4) to consider changing the way we write resolutions to challenge notions
of agency in debate to provide new and meaningful learning

vacuous, just completely vacuous...  all of this suggests that shit isn't
meaningful in the squo-- who are you to say that, what arguments do you make
to support such claims? why are you doing this?

OH I GET IT!!!!  no one has signed up for your stupid camp yet and you want
people to think that it will like change their lives or something so you are
bloviating about nonsense that is suppose to be all inspiring and
"changey".  That's cute but i think the QUALITY of argumentation and
education should probably be more important than the ideology that drives
it. You have exhibited nothing but vacuous unsubstantiated claims that i
pray to god no debater is dumb enough to align themselves with. People work
really hard to make this community better and some of them are really really
good at it--- You are not one of those people-- and will likely make
everything you touch dumber...  PARENTS copperheads, diamond backs, bears,
mountain lions, black widows, brown recluse, deer ticks, and hippies without
insurance are all waiting for your children at the LOON--- please send them
to WDI, ADI, Wyoming, or even Towson. THE LOON IS DUMB, DANGEROUS, and A
For those of you who might think that the LOON will change your life---it
won't unless being out 750 dollars will change your life(which it might,
probably not for the better).

As for me not caring about the stuff you say, believe it or not, this is fun
for me.  I don't really care about what you say however I do sort of care
about debate and its not that i am worried that you could destroy it--i just
fear that you might make it dumb and anything i can do to protect debate
from being dumb is well worth my time.

And, Jackie... words are  indeed weapons and although i havnt been in a
fight since the third grade and yeah she was a girl but i kicked her ass
then and im kicking you all's ass now.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090425/cc2ec062/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list