Jump to content

time_stops

Member
  • Content Count

    560
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by time_stops

  1. time_stops

    TOC in Kansas

    This is very good news.
  2. I guess if you consider Alexa Moutevelis a "prophet" then yes the evidence would be from one. You can find this card in the JEDI DADT case.
  3. Running T on establish is stupid...unless the policy has already been established. Repealing DADT does establish a policy. That policy is then allowing Homosexuals in the Military. Something that was previously disallowed is now allowed. Seems as though a new policy is being established.
  4. There is evidence that says that repealing DADT would directly increase the number of people serving in the military.
  5. time_stops

    Strategy

    your decision should weigh to the side of which style is acceptable and understandable for the judging you will be seeing. If your going to run a critique though you better know it forwards and backwards, like the back of your hand, [insert another cliche' phrase about knowing something really well]. Otherwise its not worth running. Also running a critique shouldn't be some much about getting a cheap win, it should be about have a good debate. Unfortunately in some places this is very rare. You should really want to run it against people who know how to answer or can at the very least answer it adequately. It makes for better debate and makes less people hate them. But i do understand the need to run them against people to spark interest or help realize the need to be able to defend a plan against one or be able to answer a critical aff.
  6. you don't absolutely have to ocr the shit. when it comes to scanning books it can be a bitch to correct everything. for instance, ocr'ing any book by zizek is going to be frustrating and time consuming. for some reason ocr programs dislike his vocabulary. the same is true of many other authors. all you really need is to scan the shit in at a good enough resolution so that it is readable. If people really want it ocr'ed they can do it on their own computer.
  7. I posted a scan of The Plague of Fantasies a while back. I would re-upload it here but my computer is being a bastard. So maybe someone that downloaded it will be kind enough to post it up here. That is if you are interested in that particular piece of literature.
  8. Thats a terrible argument that terrible teams will make against your criticism. The problem is not just the use of the word but the meaning it carries. You are criticizing their discourse because of what meaning it conveys and what it tries to normalize. There is an apparent difference in the way and context in which each team uses the word. It just so happens that you use it in a productive way and they use it in a destructive way. Call teams out on this, they are dumbasses if they make this argument because it gets them nowhere and in fact could be a link to your criticism. Its feasable any year. The challenge is knowing what you are talking about when running it. Its never feasable to run an argument that you don't understand.
  9. ...because we should totally model all of our arguments off of psychedelic rock bands from the 70's.
  10. OMG LOLZ IF I PLAY MUSIC DURING THE ROUND IT WILL MAKE ME TEH COOLEST TEHEHEHEHEHE.
  11. kindof a tangent but is the Friere that your talking about the person that wrote Pedagogy of the Oppressed?
  12. I don't think Jordan got it completely right. Its the interpretation/spoof of fallout boy's Dance Dance. Btw sarcasm is present in the above statement. Just so people don't get pissed off at me.
  13. time_stops

    JEDI

    haha im just fucking with will. Jesus, cross-x is most definately the place where people don't get sarcasm. Im not gonna take anything away from will, hes a total baller.
  14. time_stops

    JEDI

    You all got third on the other side of the bracket but we (Trevor and I) beat you all in round six and were seeded higher than you. So in the overall results Allsup/Curiel took third. But mad props to you all in that round 6 face-off with us...it was a great round.
  15. Thusfar JEDI looks like this: Samuels/Regnier Lab: DADT Aff Morris/Souders Lab: AmeriCorps Aff Warner/Shook Lab: PeaceCorps Aff
  16. Lolz, Foucault is used EVERY year because he's just so trendy. OMGZ T3H B!0P0W3R T3H3
  17. lolz, they're called jump drives. Maybe there is some reason you refer to these devices this way, but they are really fucking helpful. So bring them if you have them. Also it would be smart for you to think in advance to bring things like Flow Paper Timers Expando's Tub(s) scissors tape pens beause you never know when you will need them, also if you have the ability its also smart to bring Printer Scanner Computer As an end note: See all you three-weekers tommorow.
  18. Alex, are you reading my post's?!?! Obviously not, and if you are you aren't being concise in my wording man. First, i said "perhaps more complex" not simply "more complex" forms of writting. Not every instance is complex, but it would be a lie to say that every aspect of contemporary debate is absolutely never more complex then traditional. And Vice Versa. Second, i didn't say that the problem was just in the minds of the coaches. I acknowledged this in my last post. But, it is true that a lot of times (not always) debaters aquire their perceptions of debate (and its various forms) from that of their coaches. When they are taught by coaches who absolutely hate contemporary debate, many times they grow distain for contemporary style debaters. This problematizes the relationship or understanding of styles instead of embracing them. I do acknowledge that this isn't the only aspect of the problem. But it is a large portion of it. When people were taught slavery was okay they grew racial distain towards people who were "different" in terms of appearance. Instead of working to embrace a positive relationship between the two and understand the other one they problematized it and created a space between the two. Although debate is not as serious of a problem, its important that we don't use it as a space to exclude styles of debating. Whther its a contemporary debater's distain for a traitional debater or vice versa. Some, but not all, of the distain can be traced back to what they are taught from the coaches. And without coaches (specifically in Kansas) who are willing to teach kids that neither style is better than the other the different styles will remain at odds. Even more students will continue to be pretentious and possess distain for each other and different styles. Felix, this is NOT the only cause of the problem. But in CONTEXT of this thread it is right that we talk about one of the major factors of friction between the two styles and thats how some (not all) of the coaches divert the focus and education away from the student to fulfill what their ambitions and views are for debate. Without coaches trying to relieve this gap between the different styles, it will be hard for us to ever end the pretentiousness and distain that it breed.
  19. You completely sidestep my argument. In fact if you look back through my entire post i never say anything about "contemporary debate being more complex". You know me dude, im one of the least pretentious persons you will ever meet. I agree, its not harder, rather its different. Unfortunately many coaches (not all of them, there are exceptions) are to stubborn to embrace these new styles. That is my argument. I agree that a lot of the issue lies in the pretentious label that is (rightly) given to a lot of the debaters who participate in it. But the move to a change in the perceptions towards contemporary debate also has to take place in the mind of the coach. Though i do acknowledge that there is a lot of room for change in the mind of the "contemporary debater". But for the context of this thread i believe that we need coaches more willing to ebrace these new forms of debate. Teachers that don't refuse to listen to it or completely ignore students interested in it. Its coaches like this that necessarily breed resentment of traditional debaters towards "contemp debaters" because they problematize any sort of relationship or common understanding/acceptance of each style. If coaches begin teaching their students that neither form is better than the other i believe we will see a lot less pretentious debaters in the field of "contemporary debaters" and a lot less resentment towards them from the "traditional debaters".
  20. Of course there are many debaters who don't want to learn more contemporary styles of debate. And its great to have coaches that are willing to teach kids the more traditional styles. But the problem herein, is that a lot of coaches ONLY teach the traditional style. Even worse, many of them will not either let their students explore contemporary debate or make them do it all on their own and get no support or academic attention in class. Look at it from this perspective: If a student in an english class decides to explore different styles of writing on a project where the teacher allows them to write a paper on any topic in any style and then choose one in which the teacher either hates or knows nothing about, should the teacher be able to dock the grade because they A. don't like the style or B. don't know the basics of it? The student is just trying to explore other, perhaps more complex forms of writing. Rather than punishing them, they should be encouraging them. Its not the students fault for wanting more out of an education, its the teachers for not teaching it and not accepting it. This can be applied to debate because a lot of the coaches just teach the basic traditional style of debate. When students try and go beyond that they are either ignored or disliked by the coach, rather than getting support from them. Thats when its not about the kids anymore, thats when its a coach fulfilling their ambitions and views of what debate is. We need coaches that are open to this, ones that can teach traditional styles and be active in the debaters careers who only want to debate that way. But we also need ones that can teach contemporary styles that won't leave students out, that won't refuse to teach them the arguments, and that will encourage their search for greater education and enjoyment. Just determining what style of debate should be taught to a squad purely by the majorities preference is wrong and a bad precedent to set. This excludes the minority of students who want to go beyond. Its like an english teach punishing a student for exploring other forms of writing when their intentions are to just learn more. We need coaches who will stop this policy of ignoring contemporary debate, but rather embrace it and incorporate it into the curriculum. Coaches that have a broad spectrum of abilities, one that can fit every students wants and needs in debate.
  21. And thats really unfortunate because schools (especially in Kansas) need more coaches that are open to that style of debate. Im sure that its a generally shared perception among kansas debaters that, at the high school level, Kansas is a lot less accepting to critical or performance teams (although there are some exceptions). We need more coaches that are open to, as well as willing to teach, more contemporary style of argumentation. Debate should be about the students, and at the point in time that we don't have teachers who are willing to 1. allow students to explore contemporary debate and 2. teach contemporary styles, the activity is no longer for and about the students. Rather its a place for coaches to fulfill their ambitions in debate. And it then becomes less fun and turns off students. If its true that there is a lack in younger people wanting to become coaches then that is sad. Because in terms of how debate evolves, we need people that are more open to and willing to teach contemporary styles of debate.
×
×
  • Create New...