Jump to content

blueorange6871

Member
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Okay

About blueorange6871

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 10/07/1987
  1. Any luck with the 'old ip address trick?
  2. 1. Neosho has always had good policy debaters. Look at past records of former teams from Neosho. Do it. 2. What is so horrible about Plumpy'Nut? Your affirmative is Godly, I presume? I didn't realize that some high school student from Nixa is the final arbiter of whether an affirmative case is good or not. 3. If you admit you can't make it to sems, then what gives you the right to question a team that does? 4. "Shut the hell up"? Oh, so you get pissed if somebody doesn't agree with you? Debate is a game--plain and simple. People employ whatever they must in order to win at games, correct? What is wrong with placing and overriding value on winning? Is that not the point of debate? You're supposed to win, not try some valiant, noble strategy that makes it 110% fair to both sides. People who use the slimy excuse as a reason to bash teams are missing out on the real point of debate--to win. I'm supposed to believe your moral compass is so high that you could not live with yourself if you did something supposedly "slimy"? To that point I don't really even believe that anything slimy exists in debate. I was not just talking about state. Neosho policy teams have always had a good showing at invitationals for as long as there has been debate at Neosho. A particular policy team from Neosho a few years back did quite well at Nationals--something like 42nd or something. Have others done better? Sure. But don't be so quick to say there isn't a good showing.
  3. I've been in the community for a long time. Well, I'm not actually "in" anymore considering I'm not in high school any longer. I've refrained from ever posting but that singular comment made earlier compelled me to say at least something. Its useless to argue but what the hell.
  4. Look up how well Neosho has done in the past at state and nationals--not to mention regular invitationals throughout the year. Its alright if you are not familiar with Neosho, however, do realize its not just some crappy school loaded with untalented debaters. My question to you is how can a team like Neosho that is, as you say, of sub-par debating quality make it as far as they have? I've been to state, albeit several years back and in another event, however, I remember well qualified judges in every event back then. I'm going to go out on a limb and say not much has changed since then; judges are still qualified. That being said, is it impossible to concede that maybe, just maybe, a Neosho team took down some other teams that had talent? It all depends on your perspective as to whether perception matters. I would wager that most people have pride in their school and don't especially like to see it trashed (for no good reason). In fact, I would find it rather odd that someone NOT take offense if someone badmouthed their school. You keep with the theme of "Make others respect you." A Neosho policy team is in finals at state--is that insignificant? Not worthy of being perceived well? Oh wait, I forgot. Of course the judging pool is crappy so that explains why they got so far. Are all the other times that Neosho teams have been in outrounds at state and nationals inconsequential? Must have been bad judges too.
  5. Its really useless to argue this point and I'm not really sure why I even try. Maybe some person randomly strolling through cross-x will realize the incredible hypocrisy that exists within the community. Eh.
  6. You're just another one of those people who are blind to what happening because your school has never been the target of people who seek to disparage the talent of teams. Give me some examples of community outrage when a random team from KC (or wherever) has done well. Its not so much that rural schools are disrespected--its that Neosho has been consistently put down for being capable of only winning lays. I'll tell you whats asinine--being that Neosho always has good showings at state and nationals and yet still gets bashed for only being able to pick up lays...that is asinine. 1 and 2 are ignorant points. So, someone is not supposed to take offense when their (former) school is constantly attacked for being the lowest tier in debate? Thats rubbish.
  7. Who is the one whining? Look at earlier posts--maybe you're reading without your glasses. It DOES matter because it is a cycle of repeated bashing of Neosho and other extreme Southwest Missouri schools. I think by virtue of the fact a Neosho team is in finals at state should suffice to deserve at least an ounce of respect. Schools that have demonstrated a high level of talent naturally deserve respect--I would never disagree. The fact remains no matter how good a team or school is, rounds are won and lost for a reason. Thats the way the cookie crumbles. Ok, so a really good team gets screwed over supposedly? That doesn't change the fact they lost for a reason. My point is that if it were a Springfield school (or St. Louis or Kansas City for that matter) in outrounds then there would NEVER, I repeat NEVER, have been a single comment about the judging pool.
  8. An ex Neosho debater. Names are not really necessary, just luxuries.
  9. Oh yeah, to add: I don't care what the judging pool is comprised of--old women, lawyers, homeless men--the fact is that it does not matter. Debate is about being able to adapt and win over everyone, not just a particular college debater who judges that happens to like shitty theory and critical arguments that make no sense outside of the vacuum of debate. If you're only able to win with those type of judges then you are no better than the team that only wins with lays. Quit being a sissy and admit that some team from an area other than Springfield could do well.
  10. Just like clockwork. Anytime a team outside of the Springfield area does well it instantly has to be at fault of the judges. Why is it that every single time Parkivew won state that the qualifications of the judges were never called into question? How about when Greenwood won state? Were the judges ill qualified back then? I'd be willing to take a bet if you had gotten to semi-finals that the judges would have been quite up to par, right? Ridiculous.
×
×
  • Create New...