[eDebate] Andy Ellis and how I learned to love framework

Rahul Jaswa rahul.jaswa
Tue May 12 10:50:34 CDT 2009


Ya, I mean, fair enough. After all, if the drug tests in the MLB weren't
good enough, then why shouldn't people take steroids?

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Darren Elliott <delliott at kckcc.edu> wrote:

> Before I get to the part about how like Obama inherited a bad economy, the
> CEDA EC inherited a youtube video crisis of someones ass to begin my term
> (more on that below) I couldnt resist and I couldnt let Andy post on some
> other subject without commenting on it.  And Andy things I say here might
> indeed piss you off.  Are you ready?  You sitting down?  Fingers ready to
> type a qucik response?  Cause here it comes!!
>
> I agree with Andy about 2 things he has posted.  Didnt see it coming did
> you?  Now you are gonna change your mind huh?  Dont become too angry.  But
> seriously, reading the evidence discussion intrigued me and Andy's arguments
> about framework and its analogous application to scholarly produced work by
> coaches and academics in our community made me consider it even farther.  I
> havent seen a good response to that.  Academically produced work probably
> should hold a higher place of consideration than regurgitated framework
> blocks that some 19 year old produced at 2am before the Wake tournament.  So
> common ground.  See thats a starting point.
>
> Thing 2 I agree with (man you are going through some dissonance now), in
> large part.  And this I never made fun of in any of my posts nor disagreed
> with.  And that is the idea of an ED for CEDA.  In fact rewind the tape.
>  NCA.  Miami.  2002 I believe.  CEDA round table discussion on the future of
> the organization.  Steve Koch from Capital gives a rousing presentation on
> the need for an Executive Director for CEDA.  Likens it to NFL (as Andy does
> below).  Discussion ensues with the players at the time.  Baker, Warner,
> Steinberg, Sandoz.  They were all there.  And I was there.  And Uncle Frank
> and Auntie Em.  You were there too.  I lobbied for it then.  Baker presented
> a different model that he thought would be better for CEDA.  He rolled it
> out at the CEDA summer meeting in Mississippi.  We created charges and
> benchmarks for CEDA committees.  We created working drafts of the
> organizational model for efficiency.  It caught on and worked well...for
> about a year.  I continued to
>  discuss the Executive Director position for CEDA.  As all discussions go
> they come and well usually go.  But Steve Koch's presentation always had me
> convinced.  Baker's model would be a good mixture of that idea and
> efficiency.  So Andy and I have common ground again.
>
> As for the other stuff below:
> Only good at debate!  Not an academic.  Inadequacy.  Ouch.  Sticks and
> stones my boy sticks and stones!  (I bet you dont get called out by Tuna for
> being mean--wanna make a wager?).  I'm offended you dont know me better!
>  Did you know that in the last 3 years I have coached 2 National
> Championships in Women's Softball.  Did you know I am a certified baseball
> and softball umpire, working majors and regional champsionships?  Certified
> at both the semi-pro and major level!  Did you know I'm an avid pet owner
> and care taker?  Did you know I have a beautiful 5 year old daughter I do a
> damn good job of taking care of?  And not to brag but I can cook a damn fine
> brisket if I do say so myself.  Oh yeah and Im learning how to use that
> interweb thing and the youtube whatchamacallit.  And besides did you know
> Gordon was a Yankees fan?
>
> As for your indicts of my administration, I will simply say I think we
> accomplished a lot.  There are more CC's debating now than when I started.
>  Others, through a lot of work on my part, will join the fold next year, and
> the year after.  We had a great CEDA Nats.  Whether you realized it or not,
> I paid very close attention to detail.  You are right about one
> thing--people often get bogged down with other commitments and decisions are
> slow and time consuming.  Part of the reason I have faith in the EC
> process--people are willing to invest time as opposed to making uninformed
> votes sometimes.  Its why we have an EC.  I believe the time is worth the
> wait.  I'm pleased with a lot of what was accomplished.  I wish we could
> have done more--we all do.  But a ton of work was completed this summer at
> my meeting and a lot of it is rolling out still.  CEDA received compliments
> as we were the first to adopt a professional ethics document.  The other
> organizations are adopting our langu
>  age almost verbatim.  So I am happy with what we did but will also defend
> your right to criticize.  If things got off to a slow start, remember the EC
> was mired with the youtube Shanahan video to begin my term and in one day
> had over 100 emails from members and the media.  Just like Obama didnt
> create this financial mess the U.S. is in, he inherited it, and has to deal
> with it.  The CEDA EC inerited something none of us wanted.  So please
> consider that when criticizing that the nuts and bolts didnt get tightened
> right away.  I appreciate the compliment about rocking that which I am
> passionate about.  I like to think so.  And I brought up the Baltimore thing
> because I was truly interested.  Your comments are helpful.  I think it is a
> model that can work and will happen across the country as budgets tend to
> tighten.  When debates that dont fit our model begin to happen in Baltimore
> and elsewhere, wouldnt it be nice to have a way to showcase that kind of
> debate at our organizat
>  ion's year end event as well?  I would think so.  Maybe the conversation
> is the beginning.
>
> chief
>
>
>
>
>
> ANDY ELLIS WROTE:
> Let's recap
>
> you made an attrocious argument for why the ec should have powers that you
> can't explain a useful application of.
> In engaging that argument i made a passing reference to the idea of ceda
> hiring an ed.
> You responded to that argument with the inadequacy you normally bring to
> the
> table (like i said you really should let gordon do the talking, he is
> actually intelligent, an actual academic,not a dude for whom debate was the
> only thing he was ever good at)
>
> Now we are here...so a few things my argument is not here is my resume ceda
> should hire me as ed, while i would love to do the job someday there are
> millions of candidates more qualified to lead an orgaization with the size
> and scope of ceda. And hey for you there at least a million people less
> qualified than you...ok just kidding...not really, i thought you sucked as
> leader. Good job to sarah and you and the ec on a great ceda nats, and
> thank
> you. But for the bulk of your administration it seemed like ceda was at
> least your third priority.Things bumped up against deadlines, got together
> with last minute bursts of energy, and often seemed to be in situations
> where vision and implementation were not synced. In your defense, this is a
> problem with all ceda leadershp, as long as ceda comes third to its
> leadership and its leadership is entirely made up of particpants the
> ability
> to offer the kind of programing, research, support, and leadership that
> each
> member of the ec envisions the misson of ceda enabling is not a high
> priority AND decisions are made with allegiances to the second job(debate
> coach). I will talk more about the second part of it in a second.
>
> We could exchange insults all day. Really. and Im sure you agree...but i'll
> stop..look let me put it this way...you the ec gets to pick the ed, make
> sure it is somebody who understand the needs of academics, the nature of
> debate, the role of the ec, and the ability to qucikly bring the kind of
> funds that could make your third job her job and your third job a lot
> better
> and a lot easier...It actually increses the power of the executive, but
> puts
> those decisions in the hands of thinking about this day in and day out...i
> don't mind if an executive has power as long as they are focuesd on those
> decisions, but i don't by any means want somebody making final decisions
> who
> has at least two professional priorities prior to ceda. I'm not knocking
> you
> for being passionate about the parts of debate you are passionate
> about...ou
> know you rock that stuff, and keep doing it, it doesnt mean you arent good
> at it or appreciated for it, it means you should not also run a national
> organization which includes 200 members schools and sanctions a season
> worth
> of competition...see this is where the rub is..CEDA is largely driven by
> the intense personal commitment of those that care, the ec, and a chunk of
> directors and a smaller chunk of students, the CEDA that exists and can
> exist to those who care is different than the ceda that exists for those
> that are largely agnostic on the question except when the question directy
> effects them. Intense personal commitment often gets things done during the
> presidents term, but then another president comes in with their agenda, and
> so on and so on...this means that when tuna opens the door for the merger
> he
> is not around to manage it after its implementd...while that may be an
> interesting debate, for the point of argument the process would have been a
> lot different if he had implemented it in his first year and managed his
> vision of that partnership for the last dozen or so years...the events
> question (where the debate started) is simlar if gordon would agree to be
> the executive director of ceda...i wouldnt care if he added events in mid
> feburary, but i don't think your argument in defense of it was very good
> and
> you seemed to think it was...enough that it is a description of a reason
> you
> might agree to make this decision to add other events at nationals. I don't
> want to give that power to the executive generally, but an executive
> yes...especially if my elected leadership served as board to the ed of
> ceda...NFL Does it...it seems to work...or at least be worth investigating.
>
> You get a link to a spending disad, hasn't been your argument yet. Whats
> the
> rest of the offense?
>
> Now the other question...Some sort of outsider on the leadership structure
> would be good, some one who doesnt care about 5th years but understands why
> you do, somebodys whose job it is to reach across competitive rivalries and
> to guide the right way for the organization...i'm not suggesting some
> tyrant
> chalie sheen would play or something, you all work out the compensation
> package and terms, you all hire and fire the person, you all do committee
> work under non rotating leadership..uses your time well in your third
> priority...and lets you have say on the vision of the
> organization...president of ceda could be president of the board...still
> powerful because they set the vision and char ethe key committees, but
> without the thankless third job(something most of your non debate advanced
> degree having colleagues cannot understand)
>
> Recapping again...you have no disad, just some d...An executive director
> can
> be somebody who you like, who handles the day to to day things you handle
> third first.
>
> Ill address this baltimore thing.
>
> Reasons why Baltimore College Debate did not work as i had envisioned it.
> 1)It never had the opportunity to come first, it was always at least second
> to my middle school job or my towson job. had to take care of the things
> where my job first and my volunteer work suffered. I beleive had it been
> funded in 2007 it would have succeeded, however i trained my eyes on one
> revenue stream, when it fell through there where no accesible methods of
> funding it to the level that it would have required to spur ceda debate as
> we recognize it here.
> 2) I tried to tailor the league to ceda's definition of what a tournament
> is. I always focused on points eligible tournaments in order to attract
> outsiders, while ignoring the 1 day tournament experience of many of the
> local students, and debate leaders.
> 3) Without fundraising there was very little i could do to expand services
> and help students justfy it to thier schools.
> 4) I had to many tournaments in one place to alter peoples schedules to the
> extent that i would have needed to.
>
> There are other reasons and thats actually a conversation i am interested
> in
> having with some of you. I bet that at somepoint in the future lots of
> debates will be going on in Baltimore amongst college students in
> competitive forums, just not usually your competitive forum.
>
> Some of the reasons this failed are the same reason many good ideas
> fail...doing them is a lot more work, than thinking of them...i think this
> applies to the amendment this conversation all started with, and the reason
> it doesnt make sense to expand the ecs development responsibilities without
> increasing their capacity first.
>
> Finally...funding..yes its expensive to have an executive director...but if
> that is really the only concern...then lets talk about how to do that, i
> don't doubt the ec can come up with a good solution....in consultation with
> the membership of course.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090512/f8dcf88e/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list