Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About FinsToTheLeft

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 03/19/1992
  1. I'm sort of new to theory debate (my first in policy debate in college) and am looking for good books on debate theory. So far I've read Contemporary Debate by Patterson and Zarefsky from 1983 and the fourth edition of Advanced Debate: issues in theory, practice, and teaching. I like having the books because its a convenient thing to read outside or on a flight or whatever where I am cannot (atleast as easily) cruise the internet for theory articles. Any suggestions on books worth reading?
  2. That's fair. There's definitely some variation by region for speed. In reconsideration, I'd say you're right about the prevalence of nuke war/T situations, it's pretty likely my experiences are biased
  3. That's a pretty cool one I got. Its free, and comes with a great timer program, calculates what a breaking record is, has judging prefs and lets you see some sort of briefs (the briefs part never worked for me, not relevant to me anyway). For templates, I think I'll end up using Synergy for flowing on a laptop but I don't do a whole lot of that right at the moment. But a template is definitely great for that purpose
  4. There's alot to be said about improving your debating efficiency in and our of rounds with technology. Loads of people who use Synergy, google alerts, dropbox, etc. etc. for debate. I always like improving the way I do things, so I was wondering what debate tech people like to use that helps them research or flow or whatever. Some jump to mind pretty quickly: Major Software Synergy MS Word/ Open Office Firefox add-ons Debate Copy Notepad applications on firefox (I like Quickfox notes) Autopager (auto-loads the next page of google results) (fasterfox does this too) URL fixer (I love this add-on, auto changes mistyped URLs so google.con becomes google.com) Screengrab (does the same thing as the windows snipping tool) File Sharing Dropbox (got turned onto this by other debaters) Windows Sync Gmail OCR ABBYY finereader omnipage acrobat pro Misc Snipping tool on windows (lets you take a screenshot of part of the screen, great for getting cards from google books and such) Google Alerts Dictation software (I've never used this for debate, I know some people like speaking for to write blocks and such) Any cool tech to share?
  5. I do college NFA-LD debate (its called LD for whatever the reason but its policy). Its similar to what you want in alot of ways, though it still has some of what you see as flaws of NDT debate (or NFL debate for high school). Here's a YT vid of the final round from a year or two back, its Spencer Harris (drury) versus Jessica Furgerson (wku). Get rid of spreading--NFA has done a pretty good job of doing this. It specifically has rules which state that "Speeches should be pleasant, comprehensible, and persuasive in tone, especially since not all judges will have traditional debate experience. Speech delivery and quantity of evidence should not be excessive. Since LD debate adheres to the communication principles of individual events, judges are encouraged to give a verbal warning to debaters speaking too rapidly in a round. If the speaker does not heed the warning in that particular round, the judge is strongly encouraged to give that speaker a loss for that round even if the student has otherwise "won" the debate on the basis of the stock issues." Now, delivery isn't like an IE, but its DEFINITELY much slower than what you'd see in other formats. Of kritiks, I saw this a little more on the West Coast of NFA-LD, but I almost never see kritiks, period. I think this is really unfortunate. I can see how the K can be very poorly debated, but the K definitely has its place. Of links ending in nuclear war all the time. NFA still has a fair bit of this. People make outrageous claims like "installing headlights over highway lights saves energy, solving global warming, which saves millions of lives." But from what I know of other formats you're much more likely to be able to beat back these arguments with analytic arguments in NFA. Of whether or not the resolution will work--Not entirely sure what you mean by this, I haven't seen any NFA-LD judges have a hypo-testing paradigm or anything. But there is definitely a preference for on-case kind of arguments. http://cas.bethel.edu/dept/comm/nfa/ldrules.html _____________ Now, does this improve debate? Yes and no. I'd wager you'd learn way WAY more in NDT. My coach and I have talked about this--I don't doubt him for a minute when he says people in the NDT could walk circles around the best NFA debaters. I like some of NFA, other parts I don't like so much. Personally I'm not big on spreading either, so its nice not to deal with that. On the other hand, when you're up against an aff with 5 advantages, you'll be researching way more. I also dislike the how the NFA uses rules. Like 2 1/2 pages of them (including stuff like neg gets only 1 cp, it must be non-topical, aff has to prove stock issues). Now obviously most of the rules have some backing theoretically, but there is another side of the story on each of them. I think debaters in NFA on the whole learn MUCH less theory because you don't have to show why topical cps are bad (or good) and such. I imagine there is a major difference in culture as well, though I didn't do high school policy so I wouldn't know. From what I hear NDT is way more competitive and cut-throat. ___ In terms of comparison, its sort of up to the individual. NFA-LD and NDT could be said to be apples and oranges.
  6. Your interpretation of presumption is going to depend on the paradigm for the debate round. From what I've read of theory lit, the 'least change' approach is is supported by some policy makers. Hypothesis testing, at least as laid out by Patterson/Zarefsky always places presumption on the negative team. Haven't read any theory lit saying 'presumption flips aff when neg cps,' though. Edits for spelling
  7. Hey, I was wondering what technology debaters use to share files. My team uses windows live sync, but I always find this software to be unreliable. I've seen some teams use forum software, I don't know a whole lot about how that would work, I suppose. Anyway, I'm sort of perusing better alternatives and wanted to hear what other teams are doing ~Fins
  8. The trial gives you all the features of the full, just for 30 days.
  9. That's a great idea, I'll mostly use this function during the summer, and I think we have that at home. I'll download the trial version in the meantime Hey, downloaded the trial version of Pro and tried the OCR software. Its not as accurate as some of the others I've tried for just images, but it does multiple PDFs, which is a ridiculously useful feature and enough to outweigh minor accuracy concerns. Thanks for the tip!
  10. Occasionally, I come across a PDF that's a scanned image I want to cut for cards. It happens pretty often if I'm looking at theory articles. I can use the snipping tool and microsoft onenote to convert a few paragraphs of text with relative ease. However, I was wondering if anyone knew any good OCR software that could convert whole PDF files into text. So, anyone have any good methods/software that can easily take PDFs of scans and make them into editable text? I'm looking around the web, but much of the freeware doesn't convert whole PDFs, just a small image file (which isn't useful, unless you can save a whole PDF as a big image?). I'm also hesitant to buy software only to find it doesn't work very well, so anyone have past experience with this? Max
  11. I recently installed the debate synergy software, but am having problems opening the excel part of the software. The version I have now is the 1.5 beta, but I figure that using an older version would work fine for the Excel part. Does anyone know where I can get an older version of the software? Thanks Edit: Found an older version on another site, looks to be working now.
  • Create New...