Jump to content
Guest Merkin

Disclosure-End of debate or start of new education

Recommended Posts

Guest gimmik account

You all should stop being liberals.

 

Have you noticed the liberalization of evereything debate? Judges are more liberal, expecting anything, not that that is a bad thing. Cases are becoming much more liberal, ex.the "terrorist rehab" aff a couple years back. Resolutions are becoming more liberal, and as a cause, debaters are becoming more liberal.

 

Now you want to use your giant "liberal beam" to make evereybody nice, eliminating all sorts of strategies that have been used for years. I'm going to keep my aff a secret until the last second, as to make the neg use some of it's precious prep time.

 

Stupid people, it's called a competition for a reason, it's not scripted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest gimmik account
does your response have pre-made case-specific overviews?

 

just disclose, man.

To answer your question, yes, we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You all should stop being liberals.

 

Have you noticed the liberalization of evereything debate? Judges are more liberal, expecting anything, not that that is a bad thing. Cases are becoming much more liberal, ex.the "terrorist rehab" aff a couple years back. Resolutions are becoming more liberal, and as a cause, debaters are becoming more liberal.

 

Now you want to use your giant "liberal beam" to make evereybody nice, eliminating all sorts of strategies that have been used for years. I'm going to keep my aff a secret until the last second, as to make the neg use some of it's precious prep time.

 

Stupid people, it's called a competition for a reason, it's not scripted.

 

Your ad-homs are quite classy but your response fails to answer the bulk of the conversation thus far.

 

Its not a "liberal / conservative" issue, I think. Its an issue of education, competitive equity, and good gamesmanship. I find myself leaning right on many issues, hell Im an avid listner to "the O'Reilly Factor" (not really the point, I just think its funny that Im seriously the ONLY debater thats listens to "Hitlers cousin") but disclosure isnt about that, I really wouldnt call it a partisan issue.

 

Now the only argument you do make, burried in mindless and insulting rambeling mind you, is your stratagy. But this argument is moot for several reasons. First, the neg can find out what you run from people you just hit, and if its the first round, they may keep old pairings, or talk to someone from your state. Trust me, they will disclose FOR YOU.

 

Second you will cause the neg to use ZERO extra prep time, chances are they heard your case before, and have a stratagy written out, they just want to talk amongst themselfs before the round, as to not annoy your 1AC, you make them talk softly, thats about it.

 

Now, to use classical debate terms, your offense looks small and weak compared to my offense, listed in previous posts and somewhat stated above, meaning weighing the two options strongly favors my side.

 

Please Note - I wouldnt me so hard on you if I didnt actually thought peoples opinions may actually change through what is said here, but I do believe that. Disclosure is good, and in college mandatory, so even if you hate it, if you want to continue in this activity get used to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Resolutions are becoming more liberal
Sorry to derail your nifty theory with inconvenient facts, but there hasn't been a HS debate resolution that WASN'T liberal for 40 years or so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest gimmik account
Your ad-homs are quite classy but your response fails to answer the bulk of the conversation thus far.

 

Its not a "liberal / conservative" issue, I think. Its an issue of education, competitive equity, and good gamesmanship. I find myself leaning right on many issues, hell Im an avid listner to "the O'Reilly Factor" (not really the point, I just think its funny that Im seriously the ONLY debater thats listens to "Hitlers cousin") but disclosure isnt about that, I really wouldnt call it a partisan issue.

 

Now the only argument you do make, burried in mindless and insulting rambeling mind you, is your stratagy. But this argument is moot for several reasons. First, the neg can find out what you run from people you just hit, and if its the first round, they may keep old pairings, or talk to someone from your state. Trust me, they will disclose FOR YOU.

 

Second you will cause the neg to use ZERO extra prep time, chances are they heard your case before, and have a stratagy written out, they just want to talk amongst themselfs before the round, as to not annoy your 1AC, you make them talk softly, thats about it.

 

Now, to use classical debate terms, your offense looks small and weak compared to my offense, listed in previous posts and somewhat stated above, meaning weighing the two options strongly favors my side.

 

Please Note - I wouldnt me so hard on you if I didnt actually thought peoples opinions may actually change through what is said here, but I do believe that. Disclosure is good, and in college mandatory, so even if you hate it, if you want to continue in this activity get used to it.

Well, you got me there. I'm too lazy to respond to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to derail your nifty theory with inconvenient facts, but there hasn't been a HS debate resolution that WASN'T liberal for 40 years or so...

 

in the sense that resolutions call for change, i suppose they might tend to be liberal, but since teams are to affirm and negate them, i don't suppose there's anything too insidious there.

 

to the point, perhaps attempting to increase meaningful discourse is liberal. but that's a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well disclosure is good here because there are teams who have the entire 1AC and 1NC blocked out (Cough GROVES Cough) even at the novi level. DIsclosure evens the field a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well im not tryint get into this that much cause im a novice but every round i've been aff on the other team has said whoah where did you get your case we've never even heard it before, we had absolutely nothing on it blah blah blah....well just so you guys dont start attacking me my case is topical its never lossed on topicality and its not the "normal-abstract" zoos, library, aids cases, its something thats relatively simple but just not thought about with all the terrorism/patriot act/gitmo cases running around, so disclosing our case ahead of time at a round would do nothing for them and plus it does make them use prep time cause our rounds almost everytime with like 1 exception they've had to use prep time b4 their cross ex of my 1AC just to get their bearings straight on what i was talking about before they question me, but i guess it all depends whether your a "more about fun and education" or a "ill do anything to win" debater, i fall in between cause i care about winning but i also like to have a clash during the debate, but from an aff point of view, its not your job to hold the hands of the other team and help them win in any way, so whether you disclose or not should just depend on who you are and what you like it shouldnt be a big issue cause in the grand scheme of things knowing the opponents case 10 minutes before the round starts doesnt matter that much cause they cant run to their local library and start printing off pages of evidence against it, and their prolly gonna run their generic DA/K and T no matter what your case is.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you love disclosure so much then why aren’t you just ‘telling’ people everything.

 

[/size][/font]

 

More like if you love disclosure so much why dont you marry it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of it this way as well, if you don't disclose, they run back to the ground that they want, their big generics. They're deeper on their generics than you'll ever be, they're more prepped on the generic responses you're going to make against their generics, and they'll probably beat you on it. When you disclose, they might go for a case-specific strat that sets the debate in your court.

 

These are generally better debates. They're also debates that if you've spent a lot of time writing your aff, you'll have real answers to the positions they're writing.

 

Of course, the risk remains that the affirmative doesn't read the text that they disclose. There are a couple of reasons why that doesn't matter. First, then like any other debate, you just switch gears and do what you would do otherwise. Sure, you wasted like 10 minutes prepping for an aff that they didn't read, but oh well, you're going to be spendign the whole day at the tournament anyway. Another reason why this doesn't matter is that teams that consistently disclose a different case will quickly lose a lot of their credibility. If you're known among a community for being the dick that lies when disclosing, people will dislike you. When the community turns against you, at least some judges will. It's a risk that some people might feel is worth taking, but I really doubt that it is.

 

Of course, disclosure should probably be the decision of the teams, yet its strategic and educational merit cannot be denied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for disclosing, mostly because i have an emotional attachment to my affirmative (Don't ask, Don't tell) and because I'm constantly revising it based on critism from both judges, opponents, friends, and my coach. so anytime someone comes up with a strat it lets me just go ahead and write a block to it for the next tournament. And it makes the debates much better, more coherent anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind disclosing my Aff or my plantext, but when they have their A team and two coaches in the room, asking for your advantages, and cross-xing you about what your plan does, and how it's topical, then I think it goes over the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mind disclosing my Aff or my plantext, but when they have their A team and two coaches in the room, asking for your advantages, and cross-xing you about what your plan does, and how it's topical, then I think it goes over the line.

 

That's when you say "bring it on fools..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, not disclosing is a way of bad teams trying to get some leg up on big schools. I don't disclose because I know I suck, and I need that extra advantage (if there even is one). But I have gone to finals twice, and won once this year, so hell, it works for me, but at least (unlike tommy) I know that disclosure is only bad because I suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll disclose as long as i know they can't go anywhere and get anymore ev against us.. i wont if we still have 30 mins before the round and they can prep like crazy before the round.. yeah..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rather than "why are debaters compelled to disclose?" try answering this question: "why are debaters forced to keep their opponents affs a secret?"

 

Are you serious.

 

Disclosure is a virus that has affected the Debate Community.

 

When a team discloses against one of my novice teams I will set them up with a strat that will win no matter what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mind disclosing my Aff or my plantext, but when they have their A team and two coaches in the room, asking for your advantages, and cross-xing you about what your plan does, and how it's topical, then I think it goes over the line.

 

That happened to one of our teams once. The coach scared them and they weren't sure how much to disclose, so they gave plantext and advantages (they still won though- haha).

Now we only disclose when they ask, and then only disclose plantext if they specifically ask for it. If they get pissy we tell them our coach only allows plan text disclosure.

 

I think disclosing makes the debate more fun. Sure generic DA's and CP's are easy to beat, but they're blocked-out and boring. (We run a less-common case, so we get these a lot). Oncase turns/attacks and specific DA's are more interesting (especially because you know the case better than they do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my local circuit, almost no one discloses. So at my first national tournament a couple years ago, I refused to disclose b/c I didn't know it was the norm. The coach of the other team threatened to personally find every team I hit in the later rounds and disclose for me.

 

Sure... I should have disclosed, but that still really pissed me off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sniperwolf - do you also block the position out so that no matter what the other team says your novices have a scripted response? how about a canned overview explaining the position and doing impact analysis? sounds like a win for those novices for sure, too bad they dont learn anything. i bet they'll be really knowledeable people after their debate careers...i know how you feel though. it always makes me feel like a super-good debator when my words can beat a couple of novices

 

pickwickian, you should read that essay jenny heidt wrote for which the link is posted on the first page of this thread. it argues pretty well that your theory that not disclosing wins you rounds if false. congrats on your comeptitive success but i think you may be falsely correlating it to non-disclosure.

 

here's the story of my experience debating teams that dont disclose:

 

"will you disclose"

"no"

"fine. sam, lets go find someone who knows what they're running"

five minutes later, we know. OR IF NOT

"observation one is inherency -blah blah bah" and not we know, and have 7:45 of prep + partner prepping for CX and regular prep time (more than enough) OR IF NOT

"advantage one is [whatever]" and now, even though we may not know what the 1AC we know part of our strategy and still have most of the 1AC to prepare specific analysis."

 

there was never a situation in the 4 years i debated where the 1AC was so vastly different from anything we had prepared prior to the round that we were left completely without ground. (as a preempt - we had a very small budget and relatively small team. there were 3 of us who cut evidence weekly, 5 who strategized and thats all.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Disclosure can hurt...for example indpendant entries when they hit, say westminster. Sure, that isnt the only reason, but a close round where they get 30-40mins of prep from a coach, while me and my partner talk and prep, without a coach might not casue us it lose.

 

But its a little bit of an adv. Why else would big schools have so many coachs and pay them anything at all?

I don't see how that matters, being at a school that didn't have a coach until like, a couple weeks ago. In your example, you'd be aff and you wouldn't have a coach and you'd hit a team that did. So, you woudln't be able to prep out against their neg strat regardless of whether or not they were prepped out by their coach. The main issue that you face, I think, is that it's not reciprocal because you don't have a coach for your neg rounds while the team you hit when your aff does. When you are neg, however, you'd want the other side to disclose to you because you could use that time before the round to figure out what you're doing, which you'd need to do because you don't have a coach to tell you. Also, if you're organized and have premade specific strategies to the aff case, then your disadvantage will be lessened. Write down a list all of the major cases in your circuit and think what D/As, C/Ps, etc. work well and that list can act as a coach. Also, I think on the novice level teams that have varsity debaters/coaches yell at the novices "READ THESE SHEETS OF PAPER!!" without the novices being able to understand their neg strats are more likely to lose. And I think that when a coach says "read this d/a which we talked about every day," on the novice level the neg will be more likely to win since that neg strat will be what they're most familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...