Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Maury

  1. Hi Everyone! If you've seen much of my content you might know that I am the owner and Director of Debate at the Digital Debate Camp. We are an online camp that aims to replace the pedagogical function of the traditional camp structure by utilizing online education strategies. We function the same as a regular normal camp in theory - there are lectures, practice speeches, and tons of 1-on-1 instruction (but more on that later). While we can't quite recreate the special feeling of a summer immersed in debate surrounded by peers, we also know that access to a traditional camp is often far outside the means of most debaters. Because we can sidestep the fixed costs of housing etc. the Digital Debate Camp is priced at a modest $400. When I was in high school my family couldn't come close to affording a top camp without significant financial aid, and because we heavily privilege accessibility, we maintain an aggressive aid program with an enormous success rate. We don't think we can eclipse the formal camp structure, but we have a lot to offer. Our camp is quite long - we run from June 1st to August 1st. Second, we offer more 1-on-1 instruction than any other camp I know. Our instructors offer dozens of office hours a piece each week, ensuring someone will always be available when you are for practice speeches, argument development, file critique, or whatever else you may want out of an instructor. We instruct LD, PF, and Policy debate. We are also specially attuned to novice debate, from middle school on up. You can find out more at our new, updated website: www.digitaldebatecamp.com If you have any questions, I'd love to take them here, or you can contact me directly through our website. Note to mods: I've paid to advertise on the site every time I've been prompted. The website owner can feel free to take advertising fees for this summer from my residual evazon balance.
  2. Maury


    It's kinda amazing that they get so much right (literally no one can understand spreading 100%, the stands, "is anyone not ready") but get so much wrong (notecards, qualifying for state being hard). Still, i'll watch it. Probably make it a ddc lesson (spot the differences, flow the speeches).
  3. Many circuits do not have a strike system in place for judging. From the way you described a round and the way you described this judge, I imagine your circuit is one of those with no strikes, and perhaps even no prefs. In that case you need to "conflict" the judge. Conflicts are reserved for personal relationships, not argumentative disagreement. Talk to your coach, explain the situation, and if your coach believes this warrants a "conflict" you will never see this judge again.
  4. No one knows why payments stopped, and no one has been able to get them to start again. Class action lawsuit is the only real option and it's hard to get an attorney who would work for what the case is really worth.
  5. Evazon straight up stopped paying its authors about 4 years ago. I'm still owed hundreds of dollars in royalties. As protest, I made all my files free (also since everyone was trading them around anyway, might as well make 'em more accessible).
  6. Maury

    DnG on neg

    People read DnG on the neg, but it's usually as part of a death K, state bad, or the new "dark deleuze" anti-blackness shells. I'm not sold that any of that is a particularly good reading of DnG (nor captures what is good about their method/aims/assumptions) but it wins rounds. Your first idea sounds really cool! I think more people should be using DnG to interact with the assumptions of the plan instead of just saying, idk, we are all molecules or something. You could make a compelling argument about the scholastic structures the 1AC endorses, perhaps comparing them to psychoanalysis. One or Several Wolves in A Thousand Plateaus is a great criticism of psychoanalysis that definitely applies to modern pedagogical assumptions: in short, the current testing and school structure will always turn wolves into daddies, and wolves are much cooler than daddies. Howl at the moon.
  7. Be able to identify and defend a change against the status quo that has an inherent barrier. So many K affs I judge look like this: "there's a problem, that problem is the most important thing, criticism is good." Or: "there is a problem, so we need to rethink our relationship towards something." If you don't have an inherent barrier, then your solvency is non-unique and the judge should vote neg on presumption. If nothing is stopping people from "radically recentering nature" or whatever, and you don't have a strategy to *make* or *persuade* people to change their mind/stance/relationship/ontology/whatever, then I can't fathom why I should vote for you. Similarly, so many K affs identify something already going on and say we need more of it. There's nothing new there...you haven't argued for a change against the status quo, so no amount of framework answers will beat inherency. Because inherency isn't a theoretical construct. It's not a ground/fairness/education argument, it's an argument about the very nature of advocacy and argument. I have some offense here too: if you can clearly articulate your advocated change against the status quo, you are way ahead on framework and the perm immediately. Framework because there is clear neg ground, and the perm because you get to make much clearer competition arguments. My senior year we read an aff about environmental activism, and we said in the SQ people were overly focused on disjointed agency and lost sight of the litany of micro-political options available to them, so we needed to invest ourselves in new ways of approaching energy, including experimental solar tech. So when the neg said "radical green communist utopia" we had some obvious offense (that's just a redoubling of disjointed agency) but we also had a sick perm argument because the alt clearly would include and necessitate the aff. When you read a K on the neg, a clear alt text is paramount. It sets the terms for competition, let's the judge know what you're about, and makes the block much easier because you get to spend less time explaining the techne parts of the K (competition, solvency, mutual exclusivity, relationship between link and alt). All these advantages are doubled for the aff, because you literally set the grounds for the debate. A clear advocacy is much much much more valuable than trying to "trick" or "fool" the other team. And if you don't have a clear advocacy, you probably don't have an aff.
  8. What a terrible opinion. The TUL Gel Retractable breaks constantly and easily smears. Pilots are more readily available, cheaper, have better endurance, and an overall better hand-feel. Is the 4-color multipak not enough for you? You really need that 5th color? C'mon boys, figure it out.
  9. This year it will start June 4th and end August 3rd. Camp is obviously quite long, but it's also set up in a sort of a la cart fashion so if you need to leave camp for other obligations you don't lose out on much except live office hours/instructor interaction.
  10. I don't even think it lasted the full summer it was started. Of course, the Digital Debate Camp is essentially the same model and has been going strong for nearly a decade.
  11. We do all the normal stuff you'd expect from a debate camp - introduction to various arguments, advancing your in-round skills, research, theory, argument development, etc. - but what we do differently than everyone else is provide tons of office hours where you can solicit advice from a coach about whatever interests you. I've had students develop all sorts of cool, interesting, and unique positions by meeting with me 2-3 times a week. In that sense we're a bit laissez faire: you put in whatever time you want with whatever instructors you want, and you consume whatever lecture content interests you. I've had students put in 50+ hours a week, and others who sign up and are never seen nor heard from again.
  12. I have 1-2 videos but have no interest in making them public. No amount of PMs will change that decision. That being said, this is the kind of thing we train people in at the Digital Debate Camp...
  13. I won't be teaching there this year, but I can assure you that Baylor is a great place to be. The instructors are a tad distracted, but they respond so strongly to interested students. You put in any amount of work and show any amount of dedicated, and people will swarm you. I have seen some amazing debaters come through this camp. The top level staff is always crazy qualified, and even the assistant lab leaders are brilliant. The Baylor debate team is renown for its talent, and it shows through HARD in the debate camp. If you are in Texas and choose not to join this camp, you're messing up.
  14. Our authors don't assume the context of debate and debate doesn't assume the context of reality. Both texts exist in alternate realities with 0 overlap. Those who legitimately claim a risk of extinction truly believe in it. We do not and cannot even begin to fathom belief, because belief is morally anathema to our standpoint epistemology. Our cited authors think these threats are very real. But they're not, and they never were. It never even could have been real. It makes more sense if you think about this in terms of multi-world theory: in every world in which those authors are right, and extinction does occur, no amount of advocating the plan could have ever mattered. And in every world in which they are wrong and things turn out fine, we had wasted our time obsessing over the plan. If the text of the 1AC is correct, then we have to confront it from multiple worlds (i.e. "percentage risk") and every single instance of extinction is a pointless world to consider. Thus, we should debate about the plan without those worlds because it's better for education, for advocacy skills, and it reduces the risk of trafficking in bad policies on the back of existential threat. The final trick of the fiat double bind, and why it's a double bind, is that you pick one half in the block. Where people go wrong is they just keep the dialectical tension instead of collapsing to the floating pik (which incidentally is what me and rothenbaum did my senior year, and is why we only lost on this argument twice in the whole season). Also worth noting for the record that I probably didn't "invent" this argument, but I did give it a name and definitely popularized it. Still, I'm indebted to Edmund Zagorin and John Cook for their thoughtful contributions.
  15. You know, it's become trendy to hate on the fiat double bind, but I'm pretty sure I can still out debate anyone in the country on it. Sadly, it's been gravely misunderstood by so many people that folks have a (quite reasonably) bad interpretation, but at its core it just points out the gap between traditional authorship and debate authorship. Damn shame.
  16. My Onion file on evazon is now free and has a substantial apoc reps K in it.
  17. The Digital Debate Camp will be returning this summer for its 8th consecutive year. Many other digital camps have come and gone, but the Digital Debate Camp continues to provide the best possible digital alternative to pricey and cumbersome summer institutes. The Digital Debate Camp is perfect for students with difficult summer schedules, or who find the cost of a traditional institute too steep. At $400 for 8 weeks of instruction (From June 1st to August 1st), the Digital Debate Camp provides the best deal on the market. However, just because the DDC is affordable does not mean we have cut corners on the quality of instruction. We believe the staff at the DDC is comparable to that of any traditional institute. The Digital Debate Camp staff is split between three levels: primary instructors, guest instructors, and guest lecturers. Our primary instructors are who students interact with on a day to day basis and who direct educational development. All of our primary instructors have at least one advanced degree and multiple years teaching experience in real world environments (most at both the high school and college level). Our primary instructors this year: Steven Murray - PhD, MA - 10 years experience as a debate coach, championship coaching success at the state and national level. Andrew Hart - PhD, 3 MA (in communication, education/pedagogy, and earth sciences) - 12 years experience as a debate coach, 8 years experience as an instructor. Shree Asware - JD - over a decade experience as a debate coach including 6 years with the DDC, currently a full time high school debate coach. Clay Stewart - MA - recipient of multiple awards for his work with high school UDL programs. Guest instructors are highly successful college debaters with significant coaching achievements. These instructors work with students much like primary instructors, but they do not shape the overarching pedagogical arcs of the camp, instead they serve as break out instructors and skill development coaches. This years guest instructors: Katie Marshall - Tenured veteran of college debate at the University of Georgia, Katie is a paradigm of hard work and team dedication whose unique personality makes her an excellent instructor at both interpersonal and intellectual levels. Darius White - a DDC Alumni, Darius was recognized as one of the top 16 teams in the country this year, receiving an "First Round At-Large" bid to the National Debate Tournament. Nate Nys - returning to the DDC by popular demand, Nate is well regarded as one of the brightest up and coming coaches of his generation. Alyssa Hoover - rising star at the University of Georgia and research specialist, Alyssa is an incredibly flexible debate coach who can assist debaters with any type or style of argumentation. Victoria Yonter - economics expert and novice development coach, Victoria emphasizes deep engagement with topic literature at the academic level, helping debaters to develop arguments even field experts would find persuasive. Guest lecturers produce content for the camp and will be available for individual instruction, but do not hold a day to day role at the camp. Guest lecturers are hired based on their argumentative expertise, providing insight into their specialties. Past guest lecturers have included 2-time NDT finalist Alex Pappas, and award winning coach and social activist Lawrence Grandpre. We believe our excellent staff, affordable price, and uniquely accessible platform makes the Digital Debate Camp a great choice for debaters of any experience level. For more information, including frequently asked questions, please visit our website: www.digitaldebatecamp.com But don't just take our word for it, multi-year attendant and TOC quarterfinalist Sam Gustavson has this to say: "The digital debate camp is an awesome program. I have both participated at the camp as a student and staff member, and it is responsible for so much of my growth as a young high school debater, so much so that my school went on to hire multiple staff members as debate coaches/consultants. Unlike other more "traditional camps", the DDC takes place all in the comfort of your own home, and it does not just end after a few weeks. The staff members are always available to answer questions and give help all summer and during the debate season, the files and cards produced from the camp will be very useful for multiple argument positions on the topic, and the lectures and practice debates force debaters at any level to improve. The DDC is incredible, and like any other camp, you get out what you put in, but with this camp, what you put in financially makes this program one of the most cost-saving and reasonable ways to get very good at debate very quickly. The staff is always incredible, the lectures are detailed and oriented toward teaching students the art of persuasion and a work ethic that will produce debate success. The DDC is a program aimed at making students better at debate for a low cost. It has produced multiple TOC and NDT elimination round participants over the years. If you do it and are proactive about putting in the work to improve, you will enter the year more prepared for debates at all levels than your opponents."
  18. Maury

    All my Files Now Free

    The Digital Debate Camp is $400 and runs from June 1st to August 1st. We provide need based scholarships which students can request by emailing me through the website or private messaging me here.
  19. Hey Everyone, As of now all of my files on Evazon have been made free. As in $0. As in, have it, please. For years my Deleuze and Guattari file has been heralded as a sort of golden standard of Evazon file. It's one of the highest selling files of all time, and has personally made me dozens of dollars. I love that file, as I love all of my files, and now I would like to share that love with you. Of course, if Deleuze and Guattari aren't your bag, you may enjoy my files on security, satire, and/or nuclear malthus. Why have I done this, and why now? I have three motivations, in order of importance: 1. I have recently reengaged with Deleuze and Guattari, and the struggle has been real. I have read these authors for over a decade now, and yet even now have to pour over multiple texts to make sense of it all. No double DG are difficult and nearly impenetrable. I hope that making this file freely available will encourage growth and development. I fear that hiding it behind a paywall was an easy excuse for debaters to read these shells and blocks with no innovation. Now that the file is fully accessible, I am excited for a potential future of the new. 2. This summer is looking to be the biggest and most exciting summer the Digital Debate Camp has ever had. Our staff is, to put it lightly, STACKED. All of our full time instructors have advanced degrees (MA, PhD, JD), and our assistant staff includes multiple NDT out-round participants and first round at large recipients (including, and I'm very excited for this, C.E. Byrd and DDC alumnus Darius White). Often, students and parents want a sample of what to expect from the Digital Debate Camp. While these files are a bit dated, and they reflect only my own research interests, I do believe they represent a small sampling of what we do at the camp. We like to innovate and we like to give debaters access to big flashy arguments. If you like these files and want to improve on these, or arguments like them, you should know the DDC is a place for you. The skeptical cynics among you can consider this a form of marketing, like a free sample. The optimists can think of it as a minor instance of sharing the wealth. 3. This is my personal protest against Evazon. I have hundreds of dollars in reserve, waiting to make its way to my pocket. I refuse to let someone else profit off of my work who doesn't even have the character to admit their villainy. I highly encourage everyone else with a file on Evazon to follow my lead. My files can be found here: Deleuze and Guattari Master File: https://www.cross-x.com/files/file/10784-deleuze-and-guattari-master-file/ Nuclear Malthus: https://www.cross-x.com/files/file/11184-nuclear-malthus/ Security K Core: https://www.cross-x.com/files/file/11084-security-k-core/ Satire Good/The Onion: https://www.cross-x.com/files/file/11030-satire-good-the-official-onion-file/ I hope you all enjoy this work, my little gift to you. Best, Steven Murray
  20. Maury

    Debate Camp

    Why can't you do a debate camp? If you have a really hectic schedule that precludes spending 3 weeks somewhere and/or you are having financial difficulty, the Digital Debate Camp might be a good fit for you. We started the DDC 7 years ago to meet the needs of students that felt they couldn't attend a debate camp and we are dedicated making debate accessible. Feel free to ask me any questions!
  21. No author payments in over a year.
  22. All 5-3s clear. Seed order is wins then ballots then speaks. Emory GK did clear and got walked in the doubles by Emory FL. The top 2 seeds have byes because ONLY 5-3 or better clears, so usually only 29-30 teams make it to out rounds.
  23. Someone was paying attention in lab.
  24. Maury

    Roast Me

    Check out Bradford A. Vivian, "neoliberal epideictic". Should have some stuff if you're talking about neolib and memory.
  25. The problem with a free online debate camp is the incentive structure. Your lab leaders have very little drive to produce content so it drops off quick. More importantly the debaters most often feel like they have no skin in the game and will stop participating. A tournament is soundly out of the question (just trust me this) but file workshops, mentor office hours (think something like 1 hour consults), organization of public lectures and files, stuff like thathat could easily be put together to create a sort of free camp, or at least stand in for a camp experience. Given my experience with the DDC, I'd be happy to work on something like this for the cross-x community.
  • Create New...