Jump to content

LAwojtczak

Member
  • Content Count

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

31 Good

About LAwojtczak

  • Rank
    Registered User
  1. im not even gonna waste my time replying to them... theyre complete assholes. but anyway. are you guys going to dulles?

  2. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    oh alright... same with casey and i as well as david and laura (who you debated in finals) hopefully we will all break at dulles (if youre going) and get qualled there. and whos napolean dynamite? i thought he was you? and im not trying to be nice... i have no problem with kiersten. we both understand that things get heated in a debate round but outside the round she and i are cool (last time i checked?)
  3. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    thanks kiersten care to troll with me? by the way... congratulations on finals. you and jenny deserve it. are you guys qualled now?
  4. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    and by the way... empirical evidence proves nothing seeing as how we only go to locals and have never been to toc type tournaments. so you can have no possible idea of how well we or wouldnt do.
  5. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    first... i dont know how else to make this any more clear so im sorry if you are still unable to comprehend this after what im about to say. BUT MULTIPLE WORLDS (THE WAY THE WOODLANDS RUNS IT) IS DIFFERENT FROM GENERIC CONDITIONALITY. SOME OF THE STANDARDS OVERLAP BUT THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE, PURPOSE, VOTERS, EVERYTHING IS DIFFERENT FROM JUST SAYING THAT RUNNING ARGUMENTS CONDITIONALLY IS BAD. THE ARGUMENT IS NOT THAT THE ARE RUNNING THEM CONDITIONALLY *AT ALL*... THE FOCUS IS THE CONTRADICTION OF THE ARGUMENTS AS AN EXAMPLE OF POOR PERSUASIVE/ARGUMENTATION SKILLS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO DEBATE. now that THAT has been clarified i will not be saying any more on the issue. if it doesnt make sense to you thats your problem. and hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah thats really funny. cause i definitely dont even SOUND like that let alone actually SAY things like that. and ive already addressed this issue. im sorry you were mistaken and feel the need to continually bring it up. but you are incorrect in your allegations.
  6. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    we didnt... and last time i checked we never claimed to? hints why i JUST SAID the argument we made on multiple worlds WASNT about conditionality... its a different argument entirely. and umm... no? im sorry... im not really sure what else to say? he would be woodlands c team. thats the way our coach has it and generally speaking (as far as how well we actually do at tournaments) it would make sense there too. and i wasnt complaining about how jacob doesnt KNOW HOW TO FLOW. i know he got a bid. and ill agree hes a really good debater. ive always had a lot of respect for him and his old partner matt. however i DID say that the argument he didnt have on his flow was one that i had made.
  7. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    obviously, christian. you are the only one from our school who doesnt have similar opinions to how the woodlands does things and our approach to debate. by the way!? maybe you shouldnt trash your own school like you trashed me last year on cross-x when i was your partner. also... i AGREE with jacobs decision in all of out rounds. thats actually what i told him when i was "confronting him". yes he didnt get everything on his flow... but i couldve equally done a better job of making sure he did. to clear things up a bit... nice and wojtczak werent "confronting uzman" i was actually talking to him about debate at trinity not that its anyones business but jacob and i happen to be friends in the debate community since we have competed against each other for the past two years. so yes... we talked about the round. no i didnt not tell him he made the wrong decision. excuse me but the argument was not a time skews argument. it was about educational debate and poor argumentation. which is why when the neg read their "condo bad" blocks... they werent really answering it. and if the argument was so "O-M-GEE" then maybe clear lake shouldnt have tried to run the exact same argument using their flows of OUR shell in semis. not true... umm... wow? if you knew anything about me which apparently you dont (seeing what you just posted) then you would know im am NOTHING like this. no... woodlands a team went 4-0 out of prelims. we had lay judges for the first two rounds. but no... we didnt get "judge fucked".
  8. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    haha we did... and didnt woodlands tt take 2nd? i think so...
  9. LAwojtczak

    Bellaire 09

    from the woodlands it will be: Nice-Wojtczak Trigg-Thompson Jiron-Sidi Ali Cherif
  10. LAwojtczak

    deer park 09

    No, I don't think I do, but even so, don't bother clarifying. It really doesn't matter.
  11. LAwojtczak

    deer park 09

    Okay well, if the bolded part appeared redundant I apologize, but I don't for the rest. If someone asked about finals, then chances are they probably care since they took the time to express some level of interest. AND it was Wednesday when I posted it, not to be overly correcting or anything. And if it was a such a meaningless houston local then why did you even bother going?
  12. LAwojtczak

    deer park 09

    There seemed to be a lot of confusion and allegations being made and since I wasn't "a couple rooms down", I was actually there, I figured it would be best if the situation was properly explained. It was neither Crosby nor the judges fault, neither were out of line. That was the point I was making. And the point of the rest of it was to answer the questions above. For example, when Jennings asked what went down. This post was in response to THEIRS.
  13. LAwojtczak

    deer park 09

    I am Laura Ann Wojtczak, one of the two Woodlands girls in finals, so I am more than able to clear up a few things. 1. Woodlands went for T and the disad/cp as well as the dropped framework arguments and probability. 2. apparently you can drop T in the 2ac, never answer it, and win. 3. all three judges were non-flow, humorous interp judges. 4. it was a 2-1 decision for the aff, Clear Lake, they did a good job. 5. Carswell - I am not intending this argument to be resurrected but Malek did come into the round well before it started (when the last team from semis was still cleaning up) and picked up an expando he had left. The finals panel was sort of rude and blunt (they just wantde to get the round started) so Malek did end up saying "fuck off" as he left the room after several attempts to explain why he was there in the first place. I dont believe it was entirely unwarranted, but I'm not taking a position on whether he should've used that language or not. I just wanted to clarify since I was actually in the room when it happened. I believe it to be a misunderstanding on both sides combined with both being tired and ready for the tournament to end.
×
×
  • Create New...