Jump to content

Lamp

Member
  • Content Count

    897
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Lamp


  1. potential abuse doesn't make much sense in the context of condo bad.

     

    No. The status of a K/CP/etc. alters the 2AC's time allocation/strategy.

     

     

    ***

     

    I feel like this needs to be said. Seems like everyone in this thread views "abuse" as a terminal impact. Well, it's not. The two terminal impacts are fairness and education. When going for theory, you need to explain the importance of both. (Fairness is a pre-requisite to education, encourages participation, etc) (Education is the point of the activity, facilitates activism/real-world change, etc) All too frequently debaters just cry that they've been abused! And THOSE theory debates are the ones that 99.9% of all judges hate.


  2. First,don't forget your friend the search function :

    http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=971791&highlight=fight+club

     

     

    Maybe this is my own opinion about sales and marketing, but I believe that the easier and more simple the better. Therefore, I can't understand why someone who is attempting to sell a product provides (basically) zero description or pitch. Relying on a consumer to search to figure out what exactly it is that you are selling is ridiculous. But then, maybe effective marketing would link to the K??? Is it ironic that this K is being sold ?? :)

    • Upvote 1

  3. i cut an entire file a couple years ago of indicting both kagans. if anyone is interested PM me for cites. these were in-depth historical arguments about how the kagans have misinterpreted events and their logic is flawed. just check google. there are a ton of people who just absolutely HATE the kagans.

    • Upvote 1

  4. Just to reiterate a point that almost EVERYONE (except T_Ferguson) has been making and I vehemently agree with:

     

    Saying the "West" is "objectively" best, or even attempting to create some sort of criteria by which to warrant that statement is tautological. The West is Best to the West because the West is judging itself based on its own standards.

     

     

     

     

     

    realize how worse the world would be without the United States.

     

    First of all, we are speaking about the "West" which encompasses a lot more than the U.S. (I do agree, however, with Stevie's comment about how the "West" is a ridiculous concept anyways).

     

     

     

    Nevertheless, sure, now that the international order and economy have been established, America is good. But imagine a world sans America? And I don't mean if America just vanished today, but rather imagine America never existed in the first place. I'm asking this because America is good because it is trying to solve a love of the problems that it has created. While we open up markets for impoverished workers abroad and while we strive for international rights, are not many of those individuals impoverished because of U.S. policies?

     

     

     

    Example: If the U.S. gives food aid price relief to Africa then people will most likely look at that policy and say, "Wow. Another example of how great/philanthropic the West is." But isn't food aid price relief necessary for Africans because of U.S. policies, such as the growth of corn-based ethanol? (Note: this is just an example. i don't want to actually get into a substantiative debate about the pros/cons of relief/ethanol/whatever).

     

     

     

     

    I am pretty sure freedom and rights are at the top of *any* value system.

     

    These are the types of arguments that oppressive regimes make in order to get people on board with their methodology.

     

     

     

    This is where the discussion gets circular and never-ending. It is kind of like the question "Which came first: the chicken or the egg?"

     

     

     

    Freedom enables oppression which causes individuals to desire freedom again.

     

     

     

    Example: The Puritans fled Britain because of their inability to express their religion. Once situated in the colonies, they mirrored the type of religious intolerance that caused them to flee.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Say you are a middle eastern woman who is foced to cover her face and not allowed to have any rights. Are you unhappy? Would you be happier to be an American? The answer to Both is always a yes because in America women have rights. A amazonian tribe is an exception to the rule. If they knew the inherit benifits of being American over being in their tribe, they would want to be in america.

     

    I find it ironic that you champion freedom of speech and then decide to speak for every "Middle Eastern Woman," because, according to you, they are all the same.

     

    You make it sound like every night in America women go to sleep with a smile on their face because they have rights. You are clearly glossing over the dark underside of American norms for women. For example, you pretend like the preordained Cosmopolitan, 90-lb mold that American women have to live by doesn't exist. (Is this not an outcome of our great Freedom of the Press?) Eating disorders have recently started to surface in Somalia because the women there have made a slight transition to American values.

     

    These are all just thought-provokers. In the end, because I've been saturated with Western values all my life, I love the U.S. and our system of government (not to be conflated with politics). But just because I love the U.S. does not mean that I am willing to say that it is BEST, or that anyone else is the WORST.

    • Downvote 1

  5. I second that.

     

    Socialism is a value neutral term used to describe ideology. It's not an ideology of hate or genocide. Granted, it has a negative connotation because of its long-term association with our Cold War enemies, but that's an issue of perception and not of the term's appropriateness.

     

     

    I couldn't disagree more with you saying that the term "Socialism" is a value neutral term. I think that the way it is deployed by the Republican party, generally, is to try to scare the moderate, swing voters away from voting for the Democratic candidate. The Democrat, generally, use the same tactic except they brand the Republican candidate as elitist and anti-middle (sometimes a very populist approach). The fact that the term is used to try to sculpt the ever too malleable voters' consciousness proves that socialism has become value-laden. Republican shouts of socialism are designed to conjure thoughts of an anti-profit, anti-competition, excessively large and thus clumsy, intrusive government. In that sense, I think that the "negative connotation" of the epithet has evolved from the Cold War. I understand your perspective, I just think that because such a small percentage of the general public views the label "socialist" in the same manner, saying that it is "value-neutral" is naive.


  6. relocate the tournament --- have the event take place in missouri, just across the border. hardly changes the location because you could have it only blocks from where SME is. UMKC campus? Pembroke campus? these are just possibilities.


  7. This gets debated all the time but with the recent ruling I think that's farther on many people's minds now. Tournaments like Greenhill, Valley, The Iowa Caucus, New Trier, St. Mark's, Glenbrooks, Dowling, Blake, Omaha-Westside, and some others I'm forgetting are still available.

     

    Omaha-Westside was not approved by KSHSAA this year.


  8. I know this analysis might be hard to observe from your view in the hyperreal, but think about it.

     

     

    hahahahahahahaha

     

     

     

    STADB9 ---

    Sure, you are probably correct. Unfortunately, if you are, then I feel that the vote was misrepresented to me. And also, if you are correct, then I must ask a question: Why haven't the coaches been asked if they support the 500 mile rule or not???


  9. I do not recall any such vote.

     

    When my father and I met with Reg Romine at KSHSAA in Topeka last year, Reg informed us that a vote had recently taken place and overwhelmingly concluded in favor of the 500 mile rule.

    • Downvote 1

  10.  

    I think refocusing the discussion in terms of: how we could lobby people, who to get a hold of at KSHSAA to discuss the problem, how we can get KSHSAA to change its ruling, etc. - these are the things that need to be discussed... not whether KSHSAA is fascist or not, and certainly not whether students wanting to go to the TOC are 'threatening debate' or 'are brats that just care about themselves.'

     

     

    I agree entirely with this. Unfortunately, maybe I'm just pessimistic or have become disillusioned with debate, but I doubt this will ever happen. Here's why:

     

    The general consensus among the coaches in Kansas is that the 500 mile rule is a good idea. This is obvious because they voted in favor of it last year.

     

    The coaches are not going to go anywhere. This is both their enduring passion as well as their career.

     

    If you haven't noticed, the most heated challengers have been high school debaters. This group of people, however, is dynamic. We get raged because we can't go to the TOC. Then, we go to college and debate or do whatever, and forget about it.

     

    There is absolutely no consistency to the challenges. So, in the end--the coaches' position will always prevail.

     

    But I don't mean to just be naysaying. If reform can occur, then that would be fantastic. Just be aware that consistency is necessary. And the types of changes that everyone is talking about will not happen overnight; rather, it will take a long time.


  11. I do disagree with Danny that TOC shouldn’t have to do what everyone else has.

     

    Um, what are you talking about? I never said that. I agree that the TOC should do what everyone has to. My ONLY argument was that the new ruling, which outlines ramifications for the school involved and not just the debaters, SHOULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY. You answered all of zero of my arguments about why it should not be implemented immediately; rather, I believe that it should be effective at the start of the 08-09 Debate Season.


  12. There should not be a debate about whether or not the TOC should or should not fill out paperwork. That is insignificant. The true debate is about whether or not this rule should be effective immediately or not. Clearly, it should not. Individuals are rational and calculative. I made the decision last year to go to the TOC and debate solely out of state this year. Do you think I would have made the same decision had I known that my partner and I would not have been able to attend the TOC this year (despite 3 bids)? Do you think my partner would have chosen to forgo his senior year in-state career to chase the TOC had he known that would not have been able to attend?

     

    Imagine you are admitted to KU and George Washington University (the most expensive school in the country). Going to GWU has always been your dream and so when GWU offers you a full-ride, you're happy. You deny KU and choose GWU. Late August rolls around and GWU e-mails you saying, "No more full-ride, you have to pay $56,000+/year now." Now you're screwed because you denied KU and can't afford GWU.

     

    Maybe I'm belaboring the point. People factor in opportunity cost when making decisions. No one this year was able to factor this in. Plus, the real question is what is the harm in allowing two teams to go this year?

     

    Ziegler is absolutely right. Being litigious on Cross-x.com is about as effective of a protest as streaking through KSHSAA's headquarters would be.

     

    But whatever. I couldn't be more sick of all this, of both KSHSAA's rules and the pseudo-protests that surrounds them. In the end, none of this stuff even matters in life. But that might just me being fed up with debate. Not too long ago it was my entire life; now, I hardly even remember the purported significance of "ontological damnation." I wish the best of luck to everyone.

    • Upvote 1

  13. I don't remember all the names, but I'm sure someone will fill in.

     

    DUO qualifiers:

    SME Raghuveer/Sabates

    SMN Fendorf/Holloway-Utter

     

    PFD qualifiers:

    SME Mapes/Perbeck

    Miege Rundle/

     

    LD qualifiers:

    OS Nick Holle

    OS Jake Adair

     

    congrats everyone!


  14. Hi, my name is Danny Mapes, and I am currently a senior at Shawnee Mission East High School in Northeastern Kansas. Next year, I am attending Indiana-Bloomington for college, and I was wondering if there are any high schools in Bloomington that need help coaching in policy debate. I am familiar with all types of policy debate and would feel comfortable coaching anything from speed debate and the kritik to stock issues and speaking ability.

     

    During my high school career, I qualified for the Tournament of Champions (TOC) two years in a row as well as reached the elimination rounds of the NFL Nationals. Also, I have received over 16 weeks in instructions at policy debate camps.

     

    I am seeking an assistant coaching position doing anything debate related. You can contact me on AIM at Dmapes219 or email me at danny.mapes@gmail.com

     

    Thanks.

×
×
  • Create New...