Jump to content
KritikallySound

As of right now- Who da best?

Recommended Posts

Lol I like how the thread of who is the best in Missouri doesn't include any of our national circuit teams. Lincoln Prep was mad impressive when I got to see them at Dowling. I haven't had the pleasure of seeing Barstow's A yet but I'm sure they are great as well.

You have to realize that people fill this thread out based on who they have seen at competition i.e. all the KC kids aren't putting east mo kids because they haven't really seen them debate. I debated Barstow A couple weekends ago and they are awesome but Lincoln Prep and Barstow like to go to more national circuit tournaments than local tournaments (Who can really blame them). It really isn't a diss at either school

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to see Lincoln Prep debate, but based on the quality of their coaching (Corey Fisher's judged us twice, and was awesome both times, even though he dropped us the first time :P) and talking to them, I would assume they're pretty good. I've debated Barstow RS and it was pretty close (KCKCC Octos) -- we lost on a 2-1, they were really impressive though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to see Lincoln Prep debate, but based on the quality of their coaching (Corey Fisher's judged us twice, and was awesome both times, even though he dropped us the first time :P) and talking to them, I would assume they're pretty good. I've debated Barstow RS and it was pretty close (KCKCC Octos) -- we lost on a 2-1, they were really impressive though.

I hit Lincoln Prep's girl team @ Blue Springs last semester in Quarters. They ran a Global Warming Racial K-Aff...my partner and I ran a monkey-sphere K and picked up the ballot no problem.

Round was full of controversy though. Controversy is fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sUcH a kEwL kRiTik! ~~~~~~!!!!

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

 

The only thing that outnumbered the judge's feedback was their qualifications!

It was fun. I leave everything in round.

 

K centered round > Traditional any day.

 

I'll just link these right here.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Dunbar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oxford

 

(=

Edited by JulianBHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that outnumbered the judge's feedback was their qualifications!

A good debater knows how to adapt to judges, if the qualifications were questionable then you should of ran a more policy aff. No one ever gets better by blaming the judges for losses.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont really understand what monkeysphere is and I'm probably not going to spend the time to figure it out, but what I will say is that running any k that compares a race team to monkeys is probably a bad argument.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont really understand what monkeysphere is and I'm probably not going to spend the time to figure it out, but what I will say is that running any k that compares a race team to monkeys is probably a bad argument.

You should really research it before you make ignorant comments about this Kritik.

 

Also you before you try to call me out on using the term ignorant http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ignorant

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have deleted the post and have changed the password so that I'm the only one with access to this account. 
I'm not interested in having my program get into these kinds of argument. Luckily, none of our students know about this forum and I'm going to try and keep it that way.

 

Apologies to anyone who was upset by the prior post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont really understand what monkeysphere is and I'm probably not going to spend the time to figure it out, but what I will say is that running any k that compares a race team to monkeys is probably a bad argument.

I don't really understand what monkeysphere is and i'm probably not going to spend the time to figure it out.

Then don't spend the time criticizing something you have no idea about.

 

but what I will say is that running any k that compares a race team to monkeys is probably a bad argument.

 

a. that's not what it did at all.

please take the time to research the kritik. I posted links above.

 

b. It won the round. 

  bad argument

  > bad

  > won the round

  > won

 

<bad argument =/= round win>

Edited by JulianBHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really understand what monkeysphere is and i'm probably not going to spend the time to figure it out.

Then don't spend the time criticizing something you have no idea about.

 

but what I will say is that running any k that compares a race team to monkeys is probably a bad argument.

 

a. that's not what it did at all.

please take the time to research the kritik. I posted links above.

 

b. It won the round. 

  bad argument

  > bad

  > won the round

  > won

 

<bad argument =/= round win>

Winning a round on it doesn't make it a good argument. I've won a round with one line of a Deleuze card with no warrants before, it doesn't mean it was a good argument.

Monkeysphere is a terribly dumb concept vis a vis policymaking with some of the most ridiculous claims to impacts this side of the Mao K. If we foreclose making decisions for more than 200 people then every government in the world and medium to large business or organization would cease to exist, and the fact that people can an do make decisions for over a certain number of people without constantly ending up in the kind of racist dystopias that most of the impact cards I've seen disproves this on face. There are much better arguments to be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning a round on it doesn't make it a good argument. I've won a round with one line of a Deleuze card with no warrants before, it doesn't mean it was a good argument.

Monkeysphere is a terribly dumb concept vis a vis policymaking with some of the most ridiculous claims to impacts this side of the Mao K. If we foreclose making decisions for more than 200 people then every government in the world and medium to large business or organization would cease to exist, and the fact that people can an do make decisions for over a certain number of people without constantly ending up in the kind of racist dystopias that most of the impact cards I've seen disproves this on face. There are much better arguments to be made.

Winning a round on it doesn't make it a good argument. 

I disagree. Policy is a game, and with such any strategy I use that works and wins is a good one. 

 

Monkeysphere is a terribly dumb concept vis a vis policymaking with some of the most ridiculous claims to impacts this side of the Mao K.

I would say that the majority of impacts in policy debate are ridiculous claims. Also, I challenge you to research Dunbar's Number in full because his findings are pretty accurate and make a lot of sense.

 

"Which would hit you harder, your mom dying, or seeing on the news that 15,000 people died in an earthquake in Iran? They're all humans and they are all equally dead. You know the answer."

 

There are much better arguments to be made.

There are thousand different arguments to be made, I don't think that matters. What wins the flow, wins the flow. 

Edited by JulianBHS
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning a round on it doesn't make it a good argument. 

I disagree. Policy is a game, and with such any strategy I use that works and wins is a good one. 

 

winning once =!= every time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning a round on it doesn't make it a good argument. 

I disagree. Policy is a game, and with such any strategy I use that works and wins is a good one. 

It happens to occasionally win in a high school circuit (presumably in Missouri) and from what I can gather, in front of lay judges. I'd like to see how well it does in front of actual competition. 

 

Just because something is a game doesn't mean any strategy that happens to win is a good one. Theoretically, waiting for the Seahawks to mess up at the last minute could be considered a strategy, but it would be a piss poor one in most games.  

 

"Which would hit you harder, your mom dying, or seeing on the news that 15,000 people died in an earthquake in Iran? They're all humans and they are all equally dead."

This just proves why this is a terrible paradigm for policymaking. Policymakers aren't supposed to make decisions based off of one person, they're supposed to act in the interests of the common (whether that's achieved deontologically or through a utilitarian calculus is a separate debate). When you see policymakers acting in the interests of the few they know (like lobbyists...) then serial policy failure is the result.

 

Furthermore, even if people can't comprehend the true value of 15,000 Iranian lives, that still has utterly failed to prove that the aff is a bad idea. 

 

We should be encouraging good debates, not shitty ones. The Mao K picked up the flow at the NDT (or was it CEDA?), that doesn't mean it's not a shitty argument that's generally a waste of everyone's time. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It happens to occasionally win in a high school circuit (presumably in Missouri) and from what I can gather, in front of lay judges. I'd like to see how well it does in front of actual competition. 

 

Just because something is a game doesn't mean any strategy that happens to win is a good one. Theoretically, waiting for the Seahawks to mess up at the last minute could be considered a strategy, but it would be a piss poor one in most games.  

 

"Which would hit you harder, your mom dying, or seeing on the news that 15,000 people died in an earthquake in Iran? They're all humans and they are all equally dead."

This just proves why this is a terrible paradigm for policymaking. Policymakers aren't supposed to make decisions based off of one person, they're supposed to act in the interests of the common (whether that's achieved deontologically or through a utilitarian calculus is a separate debate). When you see policymakers acting in the interests of the few they know (like lobbyists...) then serial policy failure is the result.

 

Furthermore, even if people can't comprehend the true value of 15,000 Iranian lives, that still has utterly failed to prove that the aff is a bad idea. 

 

We should be encouraging good debates, not shitty ones. The Mao K picked up the flow at the NDT (or was it CEDA?), that doesn't mean it's not a shitty argument that's generally a waste of everyone's time. 

we should be encouraging good debates, not shitty ones.

 

First off, this is very subjective. I don't know who made you the tell-all of what is and isn't good in a sphere of debate.

What you deem a "shitty" debate is what I and others deem a very educational and good debate. Second, ultimately a way to determine if something is a good debate can be reflected in whether or not the round is educational.  How much talking is done about the round and the subject after the round. If you think this is a waste of time then that's just your opinion, many other debaters will contend otherwise.

 

Also if you really want to hit this point, wrong kritik to honestly discuss it on.  There are far worse k's out there. Time cube, Ashtar, Blasphemy, Sadism, etc. 

 

I for one will say that the same old rudimentary politics or traditional debates we have almost every round aren't good ones and are boring. 

 

Onto what you said to the monkeysphere K. 

I could answer what you said, but honestly it would be pointless, for me at leastto sit and here debate whether or not you and I think the K is legitimate or not as the point of this post in particular isn't to debate the kritik. I will say however, acting inside the same sphere (i.e. monkeysphere) that continues to be the root cause of virtually all calculable impacts and atrocities, isn't a very good policymaking paradigm either.  

Finally onto what you said about it hitting actual competition, need I remind you we did win against a circuit team with it in the above mentioned round. We've picked up lay and flow/college judges. That just accounts to versatility of the argument. 

Edited by JulianBHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>assuming it's only won once

Snark's argument is that it's not a sustainable strategy. It's something you pop someone on if they aren't prepared, but in terms of a "good" strategy it isn't there, and wouldn't be sustainable against a team that knows the argument over multiple rounds.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snark's argument is that it's not a sustainable strategy. It's something you pop someone on if they aren't prepared, but in terms of a "good" strategy it isn't there, and wouldn't be sustainable against a team that knows the argument over multiple rounds.

ALL SHOULD PM ME FOR V DEBATE TOURNEY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Best all around team (Speed/Lay): Johnny Christy and Tyler from Lee's Summit

Best Squad: Liberty

Coach of the year: Baldwin

Best speed-style team:  Park Hill LY

Best lay team: RSHS DC

Best Affirmative Team: LNHS RS

Best Negative Team: LHS Stef and Nat

Prettiest Speaker: Johnny Christy

Fastest Debater: Kendall Stockard

Best 1A: Tyler Butler

Best 2A: Lucas Peterson

Best 1N: Nat from Liberty

Best 2N: Derek Rogers

Most likely to do well next year in high school: LHS Potter/Partner

Best Judge(s): LOL

Most underrated team: PHSHS A

Best K debater: Belton PC

Best Politics Debater: Dempsey

Best T Debater: Derek Rogers

Most likely to be NDT champion: Brent Lamb

Nicest debater to chat with outside of rounds: Johnny Christy

Best evidence: McNutt '13

Best argument: Monkey sphere

Worst argument: Spending

Best aff: Arctic Ports

Best excuse for losing a round: "719-332-6424 hmu, sorry for the neg, aff was hot."

Best tournament for between-rounds hanging out: Parkview

Best human being: Johnny Christy

 

Lol, I love how BS never gets mentioned. Despite qualifying 2 teams last year in Show me. Maybe because we don't buddy-up with any other schools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we should be encouraging good debates, not shitty ones.

 

First off, this is very subjective. I don't know who made you the tell-all of what is and isn't good in a sphere of debate.

What you deem a "shitty" debate is what I and others deem a very educational and good debate. Second, ultimately a way to determine if something is a good debate can be reflected in whether or not the round is educational.  How much talking is done about the round and the subject after the round. If you think this is a waste of time then that's just your opinion, many other debaters will contend otherwise.

 

Also if you really want to hit this point, wrong kritik to honestly discuss it on.  There are far worse k's out there. Time cube, Ashtar, Blasphemy, Sadism, etc. 

 

I for one will say that the same old rudimentary politics or traditional debates we have almost every round aren't good ones and are boring. 

 

Onto what you said to the monkeysphere K. 

I could answer what you said, but honestly it would be pointless, for me at leastto sit and here debate whether or not you and I think the K is legitimate or not as the point of this post in particular isn't to debate the kritik. I will say however, acting inside the same sphere (i.e. monkeysphere) that continues to be the root cause of virtually all calculable impacts and atrocities, isn't a very good policymaking paradigm either.  

Finally onto what you said about it hitting actual competition, need I remind you we did win against a circuit team with it in the above mentioned round. We've picked up lay and flow/college judges. That just accounts to versatility of the argument. 

You almost got DQed in the process of picking up that ballot. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You almost got DQed in the process of picking up that ballot. lol

But we didn't. I'll leave the rest to that day and round.

Edited by JulianBHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, I love how BS never gets mentioned. Despite qualifying 2 teams last year in Show me. Maybe because we don't buddy-up with any other schools.

I think a lot of people are waiting for districts to be over before filling it out or giving their commendations, but I agree, BS definitely should (and I believe will) be mentioned when that happens.

Edited by JulianBHS
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But we didn't. I'll leave the rest to that day and round.

I wasn't in the round so I am not going to speak on the subject further.

 

AS FOR MONKEYSPHERE:

As my great idol/savior Andre 3000 once said...

 

Monkey Sphere has picked up ballots against lay-oriented teams, only picked up a ballot against a nat circuit team with a lay judge... If you are looking to your record as justification for the argument, I would say you don't have the most sound data to base those claims...

 

Not saying 1 off anthro is a great strat either, but at least we have a solid record against quality competition. Also, I don't read Anthro to be a troll... It is a straight up K with common answers, unlike Monkeysphere (Which btw most debaters group with arguements like timecube and ashtar) which are run for the "shock and awe" factor against lower quality competition who freeze up in those rounds.

 

Bottom line... Missouri debate contains 3 types of debaters.

1. Those who confuse quality debate with obscure, "Let's out-left them" debate. This includes the mentality of "I don't want to disclose because I don't want them to prep my arguments." Monkeysphere falls under this umbrella.

2. Those who are ignorant to the world of obscure Ks, nuance theory, and any other non-traditional debate techniques. Most of southern/eastern Missouri falls under this category.

3. Those who are aware how shitty things are in Missouri, and desperately want to debate at a higher level, beyond the shit slinging that occurs at most tournaments. Wonder why barstow never comes around local tournaments? Why Lincoln Prep don't give af when they drop a ballot to monkey sphere? Because it is expected under they lay-saturated circuits we debate in.

 

Debate should be about substance and intellect. Not about showmanship. Or who can be the bigger troll...

Edited by LordDebater
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong... I have no beef with any teams in our area. I just hate how we are isolated and irritated at the overall situation.

  • Upvote 1

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...