[eDebate] The CSIS Debaters Who Blog
Thu Sep 10 00:43:20 CDT 2009
Again, I'm not worried about the blog being without authors as an
indict of Jones or Warden's ethics. I understand exactly why it was
done this way and how to obtain the author info. I'm worried about our
people (read: debaters & coaches) misrepresenting the evidence as
"CSIS" rather than "1st yr CSIS intern Warden", because to me that is
VERY different. Let's don't pretend that this doesn't happen at time
when debaters and coaches look at a card and say "I can't really
defend this individual, but the organization they work for or
magazine/paper they're writing for is very reputable. I'll cite that".
This is the practice I'm trying to head off.
The rest of J.P.'s comment I'm ok with. Jones and Warden could make
excellent arguments that are logically impenetrable by expert
evidence. I don't believe that they do and I do not and will not
consider their evidence to be of comparable quality as an expert's if
that claim is contested.
More information about the Mailman