[eDebate] Paperless and judge philosophies

Nick Ryan runlittleman
Wed Sep 23 17:22:04 CDT 2009


Apparently that didn't attach (I blame word 2007) here it is again
with a send space link http://www.sendspace.com/file/4199ie and I've
attached it again here with word 03

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Nick Ryan <runlittleman at gmail.com> wrote:
> Liberty experimented with a solution to the jump drive problem at Georgia
> State that for the most part enjoyed extensive success in minimizing wasted
> time in-round and created several other benefits as well (like Malcom we say
> for the most part because we have some teams who have put a lot of effort
> into making paperless work, and some that have not).
>
> The system connects three laptops together on an isolated wireless network
> that does not require an external router, but rather uses only the internal
> wireless cards of the three computers to instantly transfer files and
> speeches back and forth. ?Two computers are for the two debaters and include
> a folder shared only between them, the third computer is for the other team
> and a second folder is shared between all three computers that should only
> hold the speeches presented in the round. ?This allows the team to share
> only their speeches with the other team and protects the rest of their files
> from snooping.
>
> This has several advantages -
> ? ? ?First, and most obvious, is the instant transfer of data between
> partners and to the third computer both in round and during pre-round prep.
> ? ? ?Second, it doesn't require tournaments to have an external wireless
> network in order to function properly.
> ? ? ?Third, it protects a teams files, and the danger of losing jump drives
> with a teams backfiles or topic files on them is also greatly reduced
> because you don't have to jump them back and forth between partner computers
> or other computers on your team all the time.
>
> Concerning the most common complaint of division of the 2AC for 2NC prep
> time a jump drive can be made available for the negative to transfer the
> speech to their own laptops during the 2AC c/x or the affirmative team can
> lone one of their personal computers for the few minutes of prep time before
> the 2NC. ?Once the 2NC starts the aff would get their laptop back and the
> 1NR would keep the third computer to continue prepping.
>
> The attached document includes instructions for creating the network and the
> folder setup.
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps a google document is even easier than a google group. You can
>> immediately share it and you can terminate sharing preferences after the
>> round, watch for google wave to make this super easy in the coming weeks.
>> http://wave.google.com/
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Gordon Stables <stables at usc.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> One random suggestion from someone who very much appreciates the
>>> importance of our community moving away from paper.
>>>
>>> With the understanding that not all tournaments or debates have online
>>> access - when at a tournament with online access - use a round
>>> specific google group.
>>>
>>> If paperless teams could create a google group for the participants at
>>> the start of each debate (just like we used to fill ?out a ballot)
>>> all of the files could be immediately pasted to that group. It would
>>> be instant (cut and paste) for all of the participants, including
>>> judges. At the conclusion of the debate and decision the group could
>>> be deleted. This doesn't involve software issues with jumping files or
>>> potential virus issues on jump drives. ?I suspect that this will be
>>> much faster, especially on larger panels.
>>>
>>> I appreciate all of the work done to make paperless happen and I am
>>> curious to hear other ideas.
>>>
>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> Gordon Stables, Ph.D.
>>> Director of Debate & Forensics
>>> Annenberg School for Communication
>>> University of Southern California
>>> Office: 213 740 2759
>>> Fax: 213 740 3913
>>> www.usctrojandebate.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Jim Hanson <hansonjb at whitman.edu> wrote:
>>> > some thoughts on the issues darren has raised (I couldn't find jason's
>>> > philosophy to respond to whatever his concerns are):
>>> >
>>> > 1. transfering data shouldn't take more than 40-50 seconds.
>>> > ----if judges wanted, a 1 minute limit for transferring data (and not
>>> > for
>>> > prep'ing in any way) would be very reasonable. I don't think it is fair
>>> > nor
>>> > a good idea for judges to time transferring data from the get go. if
>>> > you are
>>> > really going to do that, I'd ask those judges to time paper teams
>>> > getting
>>> > files to the other team (and to time re-filing at the end of the
>>> > debate)
>>> > ----teams should do transfer drills--practice so they do it quickly.
>>> > ----remember that at the end of the debate--the debaters are ready to
>>> > go to
>>> > their next round pretty much right away instead of taking 15-20 minutes
>>> > to
>>> > get their stuff refiled and then trudging with tubs and cart to their
>>> > next
>>> > round. that is time saved for dave's doughnuts. :)
>>> >
>>> > 2. re laptops for the block
>>> > ----the aff should give the files to the neg on TWO computers so both
>>> > the
>>> > 2nc and 1nr can prep
>>> >
>>> > 3. re netbooks
>>> > ----if the screen is really small and I can totally understand this as
>>> > an
>>> > issue
>>> > ----netbooks are cheap but you can get $350-$550 totally useable
>>> > laptops
>>> > (inspiron 15s; they have other types available too). at
>>> > dell:
>>> >
>>> > http://www.dell.com/us/en/dfh/notebooks/ct.aspx?refid=notebooks&s=dfh&cs=22
>>> >
>>> > jim :)
>>> > hansonjb at whitman.edu
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --------------------------------------------------
>>> > From: "Darren Elliott" <delliott at KCKCC.EDU>
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:40 PM
>>> > To: "Jason Russell" <jasonlrussell1 at gmail.com>; <edebate at ndtceda.com>
>>> > Subject: [eDebate] Paperless and judge philosophies
>>> >
>>> > I've read Russell's updated philosophy and it reminded me to make a
>>> > brief
>>> > post after judging 9 rounds at UNI this weekend in the dawn of
>>> > paperless
>>> > debate.
>>> >
>>> > I am not sure how I feel yet, and am looking at feedback/experiences of
>>> > others. ?So I have yet to decide about the prep time issue Jason
>>> > elucidates
>>> > but am leaning his direction. ?It would be nice if other judges would
>>> > state
>>> > if they have a feeling about this one way or the other.
>>> >
>>> > Experiences this weekend with paperless teams:
>>> > 1. ?Extremely slow in terms of transfering data. ?I gave leeway since
>>> > it was
>>> > the first tournament and its new and some of them even complained "It's
>>> > not
>>> > my choice, coaches forced it on us". ?I began keeping track of time
>>> > between
>>> > "stop prep" and actual speech starting time to transfer data. ?Avg
>>> > amount--3
>>> > min 33 sec per speech. ?Multiply that by 4-5 speeches by 4 debates a
>>> > day.
>>> > Now Steinberg has to eat two donuts! ?Seriously this is an issue. ?I
>>> > didnt
>>> > take it off prep time this weekend. ?But like I said leaning Russell's
>>> > way.
>>> > If we add 15 minutes to every debate thats an hour to every day. ?Some
>>> > of
>>> > the transfer issues were people relying on an internet connection to do
>>> > it--never reliable at many tournaments, some were because of the speed
>>> > the
>>> > computer could keep up with I'm sure, and others were people finishing
>>> > and
>>> > not even having a jump drive where they knew where it was before they
>>> > started prepping (here's an idea--keep it in the computer). ?: )
>>> >
>>> > 2. ?Most teams transferred data to the small netbooks. ?A couple times
>>> > the
>>> > other team clearly was not happy to have to read from such a small
>>> > computer.
>>> > Not sure how I feel about this.
>>> >
>>> > 3. ?Transferring data and letting the team have the whole speech and
>>> > asking
>>> > them not to read ahead. ?I think this is a good idea and is reasonable
>>> > as a
>>> > best practice.
>>> >
>>> > 4. ?One team offered to jump it to the other team's computer, put it on
>>> > a
>>> > 3rd computer, OR print it out. ?I like this option best. ?It's good for
>>> > the
>>> > opponent who does not want to have to deal with your computer AND
>>> > allows
>>> > them to split the 2AC for the block's prep time. ?This last thing is a
>>> > big
>>> > concern for me. ?When the info is jumped to a 3rd computer only, the
>>> > block
>>> > has to share that computer to prep. ?Paper 2AC's are something the
>>> > block can
>>> > split up physically with no issue. ?So I am concerned for the block's
>>> > ability to prep off 1 single computer.
>>> >
>>> > Those are just some random thoughts and experiences I had. ?My biggest
>>> > concerns are the prep time issue, and like I said I am leaning
>>> > Russell's
>>> > direction--counts as prep. ?The utility of paperless for the opponent
>>> > is
>>> > also a big concern I have and something that created some minor issues
>>> > this
>>> > past weekend.
>>> >
>>> > Would love to hear solutions to the above problems from those who have
>>> > become experts at this. ?Would also like to know the prep time stance
>>> > of
>>> > other judges.
>>> >
>>> > thanks,
>>> > chief
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ________________________________________
>>> > From: edebate-bounces at www.ndtceda.com [edebate-bounces at www.ndtceda.com]
>>> > On
>>> > Behalf Of Jason Russell [jasonlrussell1 at gmail.com]
>>> > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 7:40 PM
>>> > To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>>> > Subject: [eDebate] judge philosophy
>>> >
>>> > I've made some updates to my judge philosophy. Some of them may be
>>> > applicable for paperless teams. Others are just about args like
>>> > process cp's, T, and PICs/presumption. Some stuff about speaker
>>> > points. Fair warning to those of you I'm judging in upcoming
>>> > tournaments. It's nothing you don't already know if I judge you
>>> > frequently, but I wanted to get it out there. It's on debate results.
>>> >
>>> > J
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > eDebate mailing list
>>> > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>>> > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > eDebate mailing list
>>> > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>>> > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > eDebate mailing list
>>> > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>>> > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> eDebate mailing list
>>> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>>> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eDebate mailing list
>> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Instructions for Setting up Ad Hoc Network.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 48640 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090923/c29c3008/attachment.doc 



More information about the Mailman mailing list