Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


TheGreatInstigator last won the day on November 1 2009

TheGreatInstigator had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1094 Excellent

About TheGreatInstigator

  • Rank
    Fondness be our souvenir.

Profile Information

  • School
    Long ago
  • Interests
    Debate, Ultimate Frisbee, RISK, The West Wing, Backpacking, Progressive Rock

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. On the off-chance that someone reads this in the next two weeks: I'm moving to China! I'm selling my car! I need to sell my car very soon! It's in great shape, gets excellent gas mileage, and I'm selling it for well under its Blue Book valuation because I don't really need the money but I do need to sell it soon. More details are available here: http://denver.craigslist.org/cto/3197606093.html Anyone from the debate community (or any friend/student of someone in the debate community) is welcome to reach me by phone as well: 303-358-1933. Please don't PM me on cross-x as I won't read it; Facebook, phone, or email (g(dot)sobetski(at)gmail(dot)com) are all valid ways to get a hold of me.
  2. A post is coming with details, I just want to vet it with the head coach at GW lest I say something that ends up burning bridges. Chris - I'm happy to send you a PM with the full saga if Maryrose prefers that I not distribute certain information in an open environment. I'll keep you posted. As for amendments to CHSAA's rules: we have submitted these in the past with very little to show for it (the exception being the lifting of the moratorium on computers in debate). @SlateEm - In my experience, CHSAA has gotten much more lax about notifying debaters of the rules directly. There was an incident many years ago when students competed under the wrong code in IEs - the grievance committee made the decision not to disqualify those students, but to disqualify any subsequent student whose coach had not made him or her aware of the rules. This has been used as a way to fault coaches, rather than the tournament staff, if students violate rules of which they are not aware (I don't necessarily disagree with the approach, but I disagree strongly with some of what it has been used to justify - more on that later). At this year's tournament, neither CHSAA staff nor the tournament staff reminded coaches, judges, or competitors that note-taking in rounds was prohibited. So to answer TejaVepa's question: no, the rules were not made clear, but CHSAA would argue that it's not their responsibility to do so. I can say with confidence that none of the five students in the room knew that they had violated the rules until after the grievance was filed and the round stopped. Sorry for the incoherent language here, I'm tired.
  3. I'm not sure that anyone in Colorado reads Cross-X, but I'll post about what happened at State because I think it's important that it be posted somewhere. The intent of this post is objective reporting rather than commentary. As a coach, I'll say that I think some of the decisions made by the grievance committee, tournament directors, and (especially) CHSAA officials were antithetical to the educational purpose of debate. If you'd like to discuss, I'd be happy to do so in private; you know how to reach me. Despite a small field, there were nine breaks: Cherry Creek Clark/Ribovich Cherry Creek Herbst/Schulze Cherry Creek Heyse/Schlomann Fairview Piper/Conway Fort Collins Westerman/Graziano George Washington Pierce/Shen Greeley Central (sorry, I didn't get their names) Kent Denver LaFontant/Moore Kent Denver Miller/Kolberg Seven teams drew byes to quarterfinals. A partial octafinals round was held on Friday night between Fairview and Fort Collins, which Fairview won. Seven debaters who had also broken attended the round: the four debaters from Kent, the two debaters from Greeley Central, and one debater from George Washington. The round was stopped after the 1NC due to concerns that notes were being taken in round on paper and on electronic devices, which violates CHSAA's rules. All observers were asked to leave the room and further observation was prohibited. Rounds were halted until midday Saturday while the grievance committee met to discuss accusations that rules had been violated during the octafinal round. After several grievances and countergrievances, the grievance committee determined that it would allow the CHSAA director, who was in attendance, to determine the consequences for the use of paper and electronic devices in the octafinal round. He decided to disqualify those competitors who had been seen using paper, phones or computers: the four Kent debaters and the debater from George Washington. The Greeley Central debaters were determined not to have violated the rules. A partial quarterfinal round was held between one of the Creek teams and Greeley Central, which Creek won. Semifinals: Fairview PC d. Creek Herbst/Schulze Creek CR d. Creek Heyse/Schlomann Finals: Fairview PC d. Creek CR
  4. Qualifiers Region II (Metro Denver) Cherry Creek Herbst/Schulze (4-0) Cherry Creek Henthorn/Coffey (3-1) Cherry Creek Clark/Ribovich (3-1) Cherry Creek Heyse/Schlomann (3-1) Region III (Metro Denver) Kent Denver LaFontant/Moore (4-0) Kent Denver Miller/____ (4-0)* George Washington Pierce/Shen (3-1) Littleton Thomas/Pittman (3-1) *Sorry for not knowing Emma's partner's name; it's not Alex Patel, who's unable to compete at State this year.
  5. Varsity results are here; JV results are here.
  6. There usually aren't too many Wyoming folks on here anymore, but you should invite everyone you know to join! Back in its heyday, activity on cross-x was integral to participation in the debate community.
  7. Also, I think it goes without saying that GW will be competing at our tournament.
  8. Yes, but not in debate this year. The future plans for the East/GW tournament are as follows: 2011 will host schools from five states - Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, California, and (I think) South Dakota. We'll have a tournament hotel (for the first time ever) and TOC bids in events. 2012 will expand our draw to more states. The goal is to have a TOC bid in PF in time for the 2012 tournament. My understanding is that TOC bids in Policy and LD are targeted for 2013 at the earliest. If anyone would like more information, he/she should get in touch with Matt Murphy at East or Maryrose Kohan at GW.
  9. It did. Sam and Miles decided before the round that they wanted a case debate and that they would prioritize charisma and persuasiveness above winning every issue on the flow. That's what they did, but I will admit that the margin was awfully close for comfort. The diversity of panels is definitely the most difficult part of NFLs: you need to be an excellent technical team to get to finals, but you need to adapt impeccably to win the last round.
  10. Voting AFF: Roberts, Kahl, Greenstein, Burch, Tate. Voting NEG: Coovert, Smith, Laber, Wakefield, Kroll, Tidwell. (borrowing spellings from above, some may be incorrect) While I'm posting, I'd like to thank the debaters and coaches from Greenhill for a gracious, respectful, fun round. I'd also like to congratulate and thank everyone against whom Sam and Miles competed - though we're obviously circuit outsiders, we were met with nothing but class.
  11. Rocky Mountain South (CO): George Washington Sam Clark/Miles Owens George Washington Sarah Pierce/Lucy Shen Also, in Colorado District (CO, duh), Cherry Creek Clark/Ribovich won the last round of the tournament (which had to be rescheduled due to the school booting competitors at 11:30 on Saturday night), so they'll be at nationals.
  12. Going into Saturday, all four GW teams were undefeated, and the other four remaining teams each had one loss. Round III: George Washington Clark/Owens (2-0) d. George Washington Pierce/Shen (2-0) George Washington Symonds/Czufin (2-0) d. George Washington Tran/Sandoval (2-0) Denver East Forbes/Holle (1-1) d. DSA Gurevitz/Finley (1-1) DSA Clawson/Brough (1-1) d. Denver East Yates/Greenberg (1-1) DSA FG, East YG eliminated. Round IV: GW CO (3-0) d. GW SC (3-0) GW PS (2-1) d. DSA CB (2-1) GW TS (2-1) d. East FH (2-1) DSA CB, East FH eliminated. Round V: GW CO (4-0) d. GW TS (3-1) GW PS (3-1) d. GW SC (3-1) GW TS, GW SC eliminated. Qualifying to Nationals: 1. GW Clark/Owens (undefeated) 2. GW Pierce/Shen Alternates: 1. GW Symonds/Czufin 2. GW Tran/Sandoval --------------------------------------- National qualifying tournaments are always bitter and sometimes sweet. In this instance, my team did as well as it possibly could have, and it still wasn't a fun Saturday. I've spent two full seasons working with Matt Symonds, Sarah Tran, and Tanner Sandoval, and I really really really didn't want to see them go home yesterday. And when they lost their last rounds, I couldn't find the words to express how much I respect and admire them, and how sorry I will be to see them go. Congratulations to all the teams that competed, and best of luck to any graduating senior who may read this post.
  13. Anyone else following these? Peru, like most of Latin America, has a two-round system. Dozens of candidates compete in the first round, and (unless one of those candidates achieves an absolute majority) the top two candidates compete in a second round. The first round happened on Sunday. There were five strongish candidates: -Ollanta Humala lost in the second round in 2006. He's a former military officer and a leftist. Critics say he'll bring Peru into Chavez's circle, but Humala says he wants closer relations with center-left countries like Brazil. -Keiko Fujimori is the daughter of Alberto Fujimori, who was Peru's rightwing authoritarian president during the 1990s. Keiko became First Lady after Alberto stripped her mother of the title when she spoke out against his regime. She says her first order of business would be to liberate her father, who is in prison on murder and corruption charges. -Alejandro Toledo was president between 2001 and 2006. He left office with approval ratings in the high teens or low twenties, but has become more popular after Peru's recent economic upswing was attributed in part to his policies. He's probably center-left. -Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, known to Peruvians as PPK, was Toledo's prime minister. He's also been a Wall Street banker and an IMF economist. His platform is economically-oriented with an emphasis on neoliberal growth. -Luis Castañeda was the mayor of Lima until late last year. He's a center-right candidate who was popular early in the election cycle, but most of his supporters switched their allegiances to PPK. Essentially, you have two populists (Humala and Fujimori) and three more traditional politicians. In Lima, there was a lot of concern that both Humala and Fujimori would pass to the second round, but people couldn't agree whether Toledo or PPK would pose a stronger challenge to Fujimori. As a result, Humala passed to the second round with about 31 percent, and Fujimori passed with around 22 percent. So now Peruvians have a choice that novelist Mario Vargas Llosa has called "a choice between cancer and AIDS": back Fujimori and risk returning to the horrors of the 90s, when death squads roamed the streets and killed anyone perceived to be a terrorist, or back Humala and risk losing democratic freedoms like that of the press. It's a really sticky situation for most of my friends in Lima. My friends in the Andes are actually pretty excited about a potential Humala administration, which they believe could distribute some of Peru's recent earnings away from the capital. For my part, I'm just terrified of another Fujimori presidency. And I don't love Humala, either.
  • Create New...