Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About redhedd05

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 06/05/1987

Profile Information

  • Name
  • School
  • Biography
    Food is amazing
  • Location

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  1. 1. It's a violation of the rules to disclose to the teams in the round. I was not one of those teams 2. There is no way they can support a ballot that simply says arguments are 'not applicable', 'not acceptable', and are non-existent when they were clearly in the round through the 2nr 3. I am 95% positive it happened to Heston and Brock, because I told Heston he had lost the round, and the other team, standing nearby, said, 'we won!' 4. I would truly like to hear the "lucky breaks" we caught, and why that changes the fact this ballot was ridiculous
  2. Lissa I have the ballot, Murray let me keep it: Good plan:) I enjoy the modest US support role rather than John Wayne "best troops in the world" issue Plan is EXPANSION of current 1 brigade to 2 brigades So plan lacks inherency! But Neg didn't attack on that issue, only that Shirbourg was operable and has operated as a successful PK force FX topicality not applicable No room to belittle plan or EU Shirbourg Brigade are feasible answer to need for permanent PK force That RDF's creating false safe havens-not acceptable arg OMB v. DMB/Congress v. Pentagon was unclear but I noted it in 1AC Aff upheld their plan, albeit hesitantly Hmmm....I would like to know what qualifies as a 'not applicable/acceptable' argument...and also that she forgot we addressed vagueness and inherency To answer PHILVID2, I was the Mech girl our judge talked to after he judged Big Spring, however since Big Spring only saw our judge talking to me, they mixed a few things up. He did say he gave them the loss, however his ballot was not filled out after the 1AC...but that's not to say he hadn't written comments on it. He claimed that Big Spring had nearly or no evidence coming out of the 1NC, and were also frusterating with their flow. He felt they did not provide clear analytics or support the arguments well enough, and on a few felt like they didn't actually know what they were arguing. And not to mention the fact that Big Spring STILL QUALIFIED to states, because our judge didn't give them lower-than-low speaker points, so they really have no room to be complaining
  3. Word Lissa. I hate how we get 29/30 round 3 and barely/not even 20 round 1. LOVE IT. And did you hear the part in my message where I said that that CV team hadn't won a round the whole year? Yeah, and you know they deserved to win our round...I believe the quote on the ballot is: "There is only an inherency issue-but Neg didn't address inherency!" I was like what the fuck, I hate you
  4. I'm mistaken. Central York does have novice...sort of. They're only on the team because they're two hot girls and the horny Central York guys are much more interested in ass than debate. This is a fact. But anyways, like I said before, the school still has no funding, etc. etc. If you still want to contact Central York, I'm pretty sure Nick Smith's Cross-X s/n is smithpants (Lissa can correct me if I'm wrong)-he's half the varsity team. I have both Nick and Mike's (the other half's) cell's (but I'd rather not post them here), and can easily get emails. It's doubtful anyone from York Catholic is ever on Cross-X, so you're best bet would be to check a phonebook.
  5. Central York won't have a policy team after this year, and doubtfully any LD...or any that want to attend tournaments. They also recieve next to nothing or zero dollars in funding and just got a coach last year.... York Catholic's coach is the mother of one of the debaters, so I'm not sure how lucky you would be there.... So--come to Mechanicsburg like Lissa says....but then again I'm biased
  6. redhedd05


    Ben I think you just made Lissa's life... Watch out she'll be coercing you into thousand dollar debate camps this summer..... but you'll LIKE it
  7. redhedd05


    We went neg and they ran their india/pakistan... And they should have won they debated better, but i would say it was pretty close....except the judge wrote on the ballot "i wish i was a more experienced judge", so yeah, that was cool
  8. redhedd05


    Yep, the 'someone else' would be me, mowery....lol the unknown 'b' part of mech a thanks
  9. redhedd05


    I don't have to say it again....after today I am quitting I hate judges. I HATE THEM do you hear?! And just to piss you offfff.... when the pimp's in the crib ma drop it like it's hhhhhhhaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwttttttttttt
  10. redhedd05


    i HATE you don't ever say that again or i will drop you like a hot potato:S: *drop it like its haaawwt*
  11. redhedd05


    Yes definitely oh well...I'm finished dwelling on a stupid decision Well not decision...'cause Meyers deserved to win the round, but a stupid reason for cutting my speaker points
  12. redhedd05


    Dah Lissa I made an account so I can answer about stupid Mrs. Smith.... I think what Sarah said after the round about her being on crack was quite accurate...but I think what she meant by that comment was that I should have talked about ptx in my rebuttal (even though you took it in the 2NC ) and not just focus in on T. Thereby keeping a SCORECARD on what was going on in the round? And judging by what Heston said (assuming he isn't lying for once) and my low-as-dirt speaker points that round, she hated that I spent it all on T...whatever. I dunno where she gets baseball-I don't think anyone even said that word once in the round (must be the crack).
  • Create New...