Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/14/19 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    You are the PRL v2. Go away.
  2. 1 point
    i've been involved in policy debate in one capacity or another for (good lord) four decades. the reason some of us "old school" peeps have embraced kritikal argumentation is because of the ahistoricality of policy arguments. we have literally watched the link stories of a thousand das come to pass in the real world and yet none of the impacts have occurred. these constructs are PROVEN to be meaningless. so what does that leave other than the effect we have on one another in the round and as a community? if the focus of debate is education, we should be educating about things that actually matter and have a real impact on the real world, not weighing who has the best strung-together farce that will NEVER have an impact on any of us. all that being said, i have seen hard policy kids OWN the framework flow and they've gotten my ballot. because, if what happens in the room is what matters, the quality of argumentation matters too.
  3. 1 point
    All joking aside, none of you are special for complaining about K debate. DanBan and Trufanov are policy fascists who think Framework is true, none of you will ever accomplish as much in your careers as them and even they can't get rid of K debate (see: 2018 NDT Doubles). This is a worthless game that doesn't matter and saying it's "falling apart" implies it was coherent in the first place (you guys remember hypothesis testing? what about the emory switch? let's not forget that Bill Shanahan was an actual human being who was part of debate. all that was way more absurd than any K debate stuff I've ever pulled and I've done some wonky shit). Nobody cares, if you write a book nobody who matters will read it, Berkeley kids already tried to Ban the K and it didn't work. Having just had my last ever high school debate round yesterday, I think looking over my career the only real morons I ever encountered are the ones who think that they're actually correct about what debate is or should be. You still probably don't know how the perm double bind works, and you're super annoyed because you lost to cap or something and still don't understand what a Communist Hypothesis is. All ya'll can buzz off, let us play the game however we want, I gotta go read some K books my future college policy coach fleeced me. Edit: Removed "ableist language" - now make a real reply or cut the crap @debategirl52
  4. -1 points
    Hi everyone - I appreciate all of these comments... even those thoughtful pleas for me to "go away" ... anyways, the fact that many of you wrote multi-paragraph responses means a lot to me. I love debate. As I originally stated, K debate has educational value. However, I personally believe that it causes harm to debaters who want to talk about policy AND research policy (not philosophy). These are my beliefs and what I am writing my book on. Any thoughts are appreciated. Thanks again!
  5. -1 points
    I would like to add that I am particularly grateful to those who had the courage to speak out in this thread. Many debaters and coaches have pointed out the problems with K debate in a very articulate manner. I appreciate this and am glad to see that there are community members as worried as I am. Not only this, but I am happy to see @TheTrashDebater share his opinion with respect. Although I see your points, I must say that running a hard right AFF and going for FW isn't a solution. K teams destroy this strategy almost every time with their blocks and pathos. Not only that, but pushing policy debaters into this box is BAD. They shouldn't have to do this. Thank you!
  6. -1 points
    @NickDB8 - No need to label me as a member of the "right" simply because I believe in policy debate. I support those who express their identity through debate. I understand the survival strategy method. What I am saying is that is antithetical to the structure of policy debate. It silences policy debaters. And frankly, I have seen too many people take advantage.
  7. -1 points
    Hi @NickDB8 ... Although I am a little concerned that you have so much time to write a paper on K debate being good, I appreciate all of the thought you put into this. That being said, I noted your arguing that policy debate is unethical. That alone should help you empathize with the opposite statement (K debate bad). I understand that critical literature is good for challenging AFF plans, but do believe that the structure of Ks and mandated POSTAL defeats the "challenging" of politics. It turns into a game. The K team just waits for the FW team to either drop something or for them to fail to offer one of the mandated elements. This is what I meant by taking advantage....among other things. Even if you don't agree with me on that, I and many others on this thread see the harms in K AFFs. Even if you don't like policy research, many policy-oriented community members are forced to invest much time in critical literature when they would rather be learning about the real world. On the other hand, K debaters can neglect to research policy research completely and win on their K blocks. See the unfairness? One group has total freedom to learn what they want and the other group is forced out of their own interests in order to be competitive. I would like to add that I am not silencing K debaters.... K debaters are silencing me. I simply believe that their valuable and educational arguments should either be run in a different format, under a different FW, or in a different entity. Check out the "out of round CP". Many of my friends are K debaters and I support their arguments wholeheartedly. Please do not insult me by implying that I am ignorant. Also, this isn't a debate round. It is merely a conversation. You don't need to construct your responses in the "even if" format. I could pull up all of the evidence pointing out why policy debate is good, common subject matter is good, roleplaying the USFG is good, and K's don't do anything. However, I am sure you have already seen all of these cards. Frankly, I am tired of playing nice. There is a lot more I could say. I will write and publish my stance whether you like it or not. Anything I can do to help struggling policy debaters is what I will do.
  8. -1 points
    @seanarchy - Thanks for this thoughtful response. I take all you have said into account. I will not be using any of these quotes. My fear was right: K debaters have resorted to judgment and anger instead of trying to see my point fo view. Its a double standard. You ask me to show empathy with K debaters and I do. I have said from the beginning of this thread that K debate has educational value. None of the people who have commented on this post will step in the shoes of a policy debater. K debaters would rather make fun of policy debaters and label them than show empathy. To answer your question, there is a growing community of college and high school debaters who are communicating daily. We are all fighting and planning to turn debate around. It has turned into a space lacking true controversy or disagreement. Theoretical assumptions have shattered policy debate and caused many rounds to discuss NO POLICY. Its important that we engage current events and the real world. Stop forcing people into high theory! You continue to misunderstand me. As I said prior, I understand that critical literature is good for challenging AFF plans, but do believe that the structure of Ks and mandated POSTAL defeats the "challenging" of politics. JUST READ IT AS A NON-UQ DA. K AFFs are another story. Your attempt to guilt and silence me will fail.
  9. -1 points
    @AnthonyUwU - please try and see things from my point of view. if you don't want to try showing empathy, please refrain from bullying and spewing hate. i am a member of the debate community just like you. we should talk to each other with respect, not hate.
  10. -1 points
    Hypocrite I swear, you have been rude to others and the moment I pointed out that you wanted to evict me from my home you use your emotions to shield yourself from any wrong! You have been rude to others on this thread! You seem to want to push the Idea that Policy Debate is being oppressed, and you are dead wrong. Neg has so many tools against K Affs like FW, T, TVA, K, DAs, and Case and K forces Policy Debaters to think how not to link to them and how to win on their case alone. Ks have done nothing but better debate as a whole. Ks have forced debaters to not be lazy and research, research, research! Ks have given platforms to those who did not have any prior, so I will say it again Stop acting like Policy Debate has degraded just cause we ain’t doing the Lilly White way. I will not be made to feel my style of advocacy is lesser to the White Mans no longer. You are open to critique and I am saying that your implications K debate is any lesser is the same method White Oppressors use daily even if it is covert or unintentional!
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00
  • Create New...