Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
kansas.debate

2010-11 KS Caselist

Recommended Posts

I think my meaning can be inferred. I'm not going to fuel this ridiculous thread anymore by laying it out for anyone. If not, talk to me in person or send me an email I suppose.

 

Departing thoughts: I didn't see any current KS debaters defend the anti-caselist/disclosure system. The people who I care about, current debaters, aren't the ones arguing with me on this issue. And their opinion, not the one of ex-debaters and stubborn coaches, is the one that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, this is getting pretty intense.

 

Also, I find it funny that you all are putting this much time into an online forum, typing responses & arguing, etc.

 

Lolz noobs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think my meaning can be inferred. I'm not going to fuel this ridiculous thread anymore by laying it out for anyone. If not, talk to me in person or send me an email I suppose.

 

Departing thoughts: I didn't see any current KS debaters defend the anti-caselist/disclosure system. The people who I care about, current debaters, aren't the ones arguing with me on this issue. And their opinion, not the one of ex-debaters and stubborn coaches, is the one that matters.

So in closing, "I'm not going to justify my inflamitory statements against the community at large and continue to hide behind annonomous posting while pretending to be accessible. In my world it is completely legitimate to attempt to tarnish the reputation of coaches and institutions that work for the benefit of as many kids as possible without warranting my claims or even standing up for a single principle or answering fair inquiry. I don't care about what those who have invested a lifetime of work and sacrifice think because I don't value anything said by anyone older than 18 (you know, those who truly know what is important). Since the vast majority of current Kansas debaters have been silent on this thread I will assume they all agree with me regardless of the fact that the vast majority of Kansas debaters have made their stance clear by not joining in on the case list project."

 

Sure you don't want to call all coaches facists before you go? You haven't even taken a pot shot at KSHSAA before declaring that you are done posting.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 months ago I said this...

 

My response to this would be to say that if the community wants to do it then do it. BUT (as others here have suggested) it should be an OPT IN process only. I don't care if my kids want to post their stuff but I would hope they would not disclose what others are doing. I would also hope/insist that they would not use the wiki if they did not disclose.

 

I would also applaud the standard from the community that no one post anonymously. This must be something you need to be willing to do. I would also suggest that it would go a long way to convincing those who are skeptical of this that it is a good or at least a benign thing. I doubt we can enforce it in any way but I do believe that if you are unwilling to post (or leave crappy comments on rep/feedback) and use your real name you should just stay away anyway.

 

I sense a real opportunity here for many of you to raise the bar in terms of the corporate behavior of this community. I would also assert that if this works and you all do actually protect those who do NOT OPT IN then your cause will be joined by more teams every year...

 

No offense to anyone here but there are no arguments or persuasion you can use with me here that has any weight without real action outside this forum. I challenge you all to start this in this spirit. You cannot buy my trust but I will happily give it to those whose actions not words demonstrate a respect for the disparate points of view here.

 

...now I don't know what to say. It seemed like a good idea at the time. It seems now that we have little direction and almost no movement.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New question/interjection. Why don't coaches with legitimate concerns but who are open to the possibility of change and the possibility of getting benefits from technology and community cooperation reach out to the college community and see what they think about the casebook, the benefits and disads of them, etc? Seems like if people want proof of any disadvantages or benefits to it asking as many people in a community that has such a system and seeing what their experience tells would be the way to do it. Obviously there's some possibility of bias which is what I'm guessing the natural response to reading this post would be but that just means you should ask your questions more precisely, really try to get at the disadvantages.

Edited by Felix Hoenikker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not a troll, but a strong believer in providing a balanced view of change that the inexperienced want to force on the experienced. Before I posted there was quite the little love fest of a bunch of kids thinking they were acting cool and in some cases out right saying they were better than everyone else because they posted their aff on a website. To be fair to them, I attempted, rather successfully I might add, to reveil that their perspective is not universal and that at least acknowledging that they need to do more to try to justify their self congratulation. Some have, most have not, and that is fine. I do find it entertaining to correct the ignorant and to open discussion where there is mindless self congratulation for preaching to the choir. I don't think that makes be a troll, but if it does then you must answer my three questions before you may pass....

 

But but but... you gave the bear metaphor and then almost explicitly said "I be a troll." But it's ok, it seems your post went unanswered anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure how much "lols" there are but it certainly is an interesting discussion.

 

3 things that stick out to me in that thread:

 

1. Confirmation of an earlier post I made on this thread about why disclosure was created in the first place and what problems it seeks to solve (see, I do know what I'm talking about.) Do we have those problems in our local circuit? Not really... Do we need disclosure? Not really.

 

2. The disclosure slippery slope is a real-life thing. It is happening right now in college. You must disclose your 1AC, 2AC, 1NC, 2NC, 2 forms of ID, your mom's social security number etc. It's dumb. I absolutely agree with Scott Elliott's argument that while disclosing your 1AC might help the small schools, the further down the rabbit hole you go with disclosure the more it benefits the Northwestern, Wake, etc machines.

 

3. The idea of a community pool of evidence for college is a fantastic idea (to try out at least). It would forever solve the rich/poor gap.

Edited by t-money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I found your post very interesting. You feel that the Kansas circuit seems to lack a sense of community??? Really? That is interesting. I thought of this when I came to this realization it made me very sad. You don't see the strong sense of community because you see yourself on the outside. That is my theory and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that since your school isn't an NFL school you don't see the sense of community that creates. Being a part of EKNFL is a big deal to me. Being a part of the KCKCFL diocese is a big deal to me. When we go to nationals, I root for all the competitors from our state/area. You haven't and never will share that experience, and that makes me sad. Perhaps this little wiki can replace that feeling for you, and if that is the case, then I wish you well. From my perspective we don't need that because we already feel like a part of something good.

Are you kidding me? I had the god damn KSDebate twitter on auto-refresh during nats last year. I think maybe I've pushed the whole "not being in NFL" thing a little far; it's not about our absence from the grownup's table. It's more about the fact that being a smaller, newer school on the KS debate circuit is like walking through the lunchroom at a new school ... buck naked. To be honest, the cult of the Kansas debate circuit is as esoteric an endeavor as reading a book in Russian is to the average American.

 

Kansas has evolved into a circuit of the "haves" and the "have nots." All I'm saying is that if the wiki can help any smaller team become even that much more competitive against the big schools, then I'll do everything I can to support it.

 

The other part that I thought was interesting was your call to post affs that you don't run anymore. I'm completely puzzled on why that would be beneficial for anyone. False disclosure is absolutley bad for "better debates", any education, building of trust within the community, etc. Why on Earth would you call for that. The only potential, hypothetical benefits of disclosure come from letting teams have insight on the possibilities of things you may run. To purposely call for people to post things they intentially will not run in a debate round seems rather destructive.

Ok, maybe this was a little off the mark. But the whole point of a case list is disclosure, after all. But all I'm saying is that posting old stuff that you will run infrequently (as I did with Ryan and me's SoKo policy aff, which we tend to rarely run) is to at least pledge support. Even if you or your coach aren't entirely sure about posting your newest and up-to-date affs, putting on some older stuff might convince some people teetering on the edge that the wiki isn't such a lost cause. But you won't do that, will you? Because it's unthinkable that better informed debates might be better, amirite?

 

So in closing, "I'm not going to justify my inflamitory statements against the community at large and continue to hide behind annonomous posting while pretending to be accessible. In my world it is completely legitimate to attempt to tarnish the reputation of coaches and institutions that work for the benefit of as many kids as possible without warranting my claims or even standing up for a single principle or answering fair inquiry. I don't care about what those who have invested a lifetime of work and sacrifice think because I don't value anything said by anyone older than 18 (you know, those who truly know what is important). Since the vast majority of current Kansas debaters have been silent on this thread I will assume they all agree with me regardless of the fact that the vast majority of Kansas debaters have made their stance clear by not joining in on the case list project."

 

Sure you don't want to call all coaches facists before you go? You haven't even taken a pot shot at KSHSAA before declaring that you are done posting.

 

Why are you always so vindictive, spiteful, and rude? It's seriously getting annoying. Let the teams that want to post their cites, post their cites. We get it, you don't support it. Don't get mad at Ciera for trying to do something that might make things a little better in KS. In fact, if you're so concerned about the horrible things that might happen if 1NC strategies start making sense, why don't you go cut blocks or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed a couple things about this discussion as it deteriorated.

 

First, I think it says a lot about the people who have resorted to insults in an attempt to advance their arguments. I'm not sure what you get out of insulting high school kids, but if you think it does anything other than shed light on your own insecurities and the potential weaknesses in your arguments, than you're the fool. Be honest...each and every one of us has plenty to be made fun of for, and the individuals using personal insults shouldn't want any of those doors opening on them.

 

Second, I don't know why this conversation always has to get so hostile. It's a great discussion to be had. Some people think case lists and disclosure are great for debate, and others don't. At the end of the day, the fault lies on the people who end up forcing their beliefs on others, and I think both parties involved here are guilty of that. If people want to participate in a case list or disclosure, so be it. If not, no big deal. None of this should be about winning or losing individual debates, but instead how the participants of the activity can get more of what they value from it, and that's not wins or losses.

 

At the end of the day, this conversation shouldn't be about convincing the other side that they are wrong. It shouldn't be a way for old people, who have nothing better to do, assert their authority. It shouldn't be a way for high school kids to look cool, or get attention. This should be a place where relevant issues can be productively discussed. It should be a place where new members of the activity can come and learn from those productive conversations about the relevant topics. Instead, they see two polarized sides of the community ripping each other apart over things that are hardly relevant to the discussion.

 

I think it's time for everybody here to take a second and think about why they're choosing to get involved in this thread. Are you really concerned for the small guys and the activity, or are you just looking for a place for somebody to give a shit about you. I can assure you that there are many of you I respect far less because of your conduct on this website.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volen, an answer is on it's way.....just a 10 page essay, a midterm, and glenbrooks is getting in the way. But when I do, you can bet that it'll be a doosey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I noticed a couple things about this discussion as it deteriorated.

 

First, I think it says a lot about the people who have resorted to insults in an attempt to advance their arguments. I'm not sure what you get out of insulting high school kids, but if you think it does anything other than shed light on your own insecurities and the potential weaknesses in your arguments, than you're the fool. Be honest...each and every one of us has plenty to be made fun of for, and the individuals using personal insults shouldn't want any of those doors opening on them.

You're saying grown adults wanting to exert their authority over minors in an overtly hostile way just because they apparently have nothing better to do is WEIRD?! UN-THIN-KA-BULL!

 

Second, I don't know why this conversation always has to get so hostile. It's a great discussion to be had. Some people think case lists and disclosure are great for debate, and others don't. At the end of the day, the fault lies on the people who end up forcing their beliefs on others, and I think both parties involved here are guilty of that. If people want to participate in a case list or disclosure, so be it. If not, no big deal. None of this should be about winning or losing individual debates, but instead how the participants of the activity can get more of what they value from it, and that's not wins or losses.

 

We're debaters. Duh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're saying grown adults wanting to exert their authority over minors in an overtly hostile way just because they apparently have nothing better to do is WEIRD?! UN-THIN-KA-BULL!

 

 

I don't find your sarcastic remarks on every single post you make funny or useful. I also don't understand why you have to hide behind the sarcasm.

 

We're debaters. Duh.

 

I would understand, if this were true. The best debates don't involve kids who lose their cool and make fun of their opponents. This type of behavior is not inherent in the activity, and assuming it is only makes the problem worse.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't find your sarcastic remarks on every single post you make funny or useful. I also don't understand why you have to hide behind the sarcasm.

Not hiding, just showing the ridiculousness of what is going on in this thread. Most of my posts are serious, look at almost any other board/post I've made.

I would understand, if this were true. The best debates don't involve kids who lose their cool and make fun of their opponents. This type of behavior is not inherent in the activity, and assuming it is only makes the problem worse.

 

Agreed, but this issue has become somewhat touchy. People predisposed to argumentation + a touchy subject = some people going a little over the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I noticed a couple things about this discussion as it deteriorated.

 

First, I think it says a lot about the people who have resorted to insults in an attempt to advance their arguments. I'm not sure what you get out of insulting high school kids, but if you think it does anything other than shed light on your own insecurities and the potential weaknesses in your arguments, than you're the fool. Be honest...each and every one of us has plenty to be made fun of for, and the individuals using personal insults shouldn't want any of those doors opening on them.

 

Cut it with the white knight act. My posts were nothing but civil until cierbear blamed an honest tab mistake at a tournament on some sort of conspiracy and prejudice. Actions have consequences. Anyone unable to take the heat should not be in the kitchen with an open flame and a gas can... also, never be on the internet ever.

 

Did I really make fun of anyone? Not really. I parodied her posts.... her ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cut it with the white knight act. My posts were nothing but civil until cierbear blamed an honest tab mistake at a tournament on some sort of conspiracy and prejudice. Actions have consequences. Anyone unable to take the heat should not be in the kitchen with an open flame and a gas can... also, never be on the internet ever.

 

Did I really make fun of anyone? Not really. I parodied her posts.... her ideas.

 

Whoops, sorry! You're right. I forgot that a grown ass adult should make proportional reactions to high school kids. I'm definitely the ass for pointing out what this forum is capable of, not you. My apologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cut it with the white knight act. My posts were nothing but civil until cierbear blamed an honest tab mistake at a tournament on some sort of conspiracy and prejudice. Actions have consequences. Anyone unable to take the heat should not be in the kitchen with an open flame and a gas can... also, never be on the internet ever.

 

Did I really make fun of anyone? Not really. I parodied her posts.... her ideas.

 

Irregardless of whether or not that particular instance was truly an accident or not (which, to be honest, I'm not so sure either way), the fact of the matter is that certain schools do get preferential treatment on the KS debate circuit. You don't have to acknowledge it, but often enough there are judges who are put in the position of (for example) having a SME or BVW (etc) team that lost a round, but you don't want to be "that judge that dropped the [xxx] team." There are politics at play on all levels, and anyone who disagrees is absolutely ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whoops, sorry! You're right. I forgot that a grown ass adult should make proportional reactions to high school kids. I'm definitely the ass for pointing out what this forum is capable of, not you. My apologies.

 

You're right. High school kids should be allowed to just run around and accuse coaches of unethical behavior in public without any repercussions whatsoever.

 

Was my response snarky? Yes. It's the internet, that's what we do here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was my response snarky? Yes. It's the internet, that's what we do here.

 

Not sure who "we" is, but if you want to associate yourself with the trolling douche bags, go for it. There are plenty of internet forums that are used productively. Proof: http://graphjam.memebase.com/2010/11/15/funny-graphs-how-tumblr-was-used-yesterday/

 

Also, tell Al Gore hi for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Irregardless of whether or not that particular instance was truly an accident or not (which, to be honest, I'm not so sure either way), the fact of the matter is that certain schools do get preferential treatment on the KS debate circuit. You don't have to acknowledge it, but often enough there are judges who are put in the position of (for example) having a SME or BVW (etc) team that lost a round, but you don't want to be "that judge that dropped the [xxx] team." There are politics at play on all levels, and anyone who disagrees is absolutely ridiculous.

 

What? Here we are talking about apples and you have to go and bring up oranges. The issue we are talking about is about a TAB MISTAKE at the Newton tournament. It has, to my knowledge, nothing to do with any judges at all. Certainly, BVN would not be the target of any sort of school bias.

 

I have been around for a long time. I have never felt any pressure to vote for one school or another, I'd like to think that I am in no way biased based on school affiliation. I have talked to a lot of judges, I know many of them quite well. There is no politics or conspiracy that occur. The sooner you stop convincing yourself of that the better off you'll be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What? Here we are talking about apples and you have to go and bring up oranges. The issue we are talking about is about a TAB MISTAKE at the Newton tournament. It has, to my knowledge, nothing to do with any judges at all. Certainly, BVN would not be the target of any sort of school bias.

 

I have been around for a long time. I have never felt any pressure to vote for one school or another, I'd like to think that I am in no way biased based on school affiliation. I have talked to a lot of judges, I know many of them quite well. There is no politics or conspiracy that occur. The sooner you stop convincing yourself of that the better off you'll be.

 

Double Chocolate Icing

(amidoinitrite?)

 

But seriously, are you really saying that there is, at no level, politics occurring that affects the success of teams based on criterion beyond their skill level?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Irregardless of whether or not that particular instance was truly an accident or not (which, to be honest, I'm not so sure either way)

 

Explain this statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Double Chocolate Icing

(amidoinitrite?)

 

Kinda. It depends, was that a fat joke towards me? If so omgiamdeeplyoffended :)

 

But seriously, are you really saying that there is, at no level, politics occurring that affects the success of teams based on criterion beyond their skill level?

 

No not really. I'm sure that there is the occasional college freshman with an axe to grind, but those are the exception not the rule. Most judges try hard to be objective and vote on the issues in the round. If you are lucky enough to be at a tournament with experienced judges that give oral critiques, don't be afraid to ask questions.

 

Blaming judges on your losses is the best way to impede your development as a debater. It leads to a false sense of ego, an "it's not me it's them" mentality which is a barrier to true improvement. No matter how lay, flow, or bizarre your judge is there is always something that you could have done to win the round.

Edited by t-money

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...