Jump to content

Rowedan

Member
  • Content Count

    182
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rowedan


  1. Expandos:

     

    They aren't exactly neccesary, if you're the type that can use an un-expandoed stack of evidence and somehow stay organized. I always just brought a tub with a few expandos in it and thinks worked out alright.

     

     

    Partners:

     

    Each lab does something differently i'm sure, but i dont know of a time when mutually perfered partners didn't end up with eachother.

     

    Classiness:

     

    Keep it up! hopefull by the time debate camp comes around, your online bickerings will be full-fledged personality wars. Nothing better than spending 4 weeks with someone you hate!

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 2

  2. Uhm so I'm not actually going to UNT, but two of our rising juniors are. Our problem is that one rising junior cannot stay for the tournament, so our other rising junior has a partner for any practice rounds before the tournament, but no partner for the actual tournament. It would be great if someone was willing to debate with him just for the tournament. His name is Joey Donaghy, he's been in debate for 2 years now, and he's a 2A/1N. He qualified for state his sophomore year and has no really notable national circuit results because well, sophomores at our school don't really get to go to TOC tournaments. But he's really fun and relaxed and a great guy. PM me if you're interested please.

     

    Two things:

     

    1. I remember there being a few of people who ended up with different partners for the tournament than they had in practice debates OR unmatched pairs get matched up between labs. For a rising junior this could give a good oppurtunity to debate with a senior and learn or debate with a sophomore and have to step up to the plate.

     

    2. Hopefully they are going to skills--if they have a bad regular session tournament or a partner they don't like, they get a new one during the skills session and one on one help with a lab leader. This happened in my skills lab and ours did really well in the skills tournament.


  3. what's better for before sophomore year, soph scholars at stanford plus fourth week or scholars at unt plus skills?

     

     

    Scholars at UNT plus skills is the way to go—you get everything. For the scholars lab, you get a small lab with highly qualified instructors teaching you about debate, answering any questions and providing you with all the information you need about the topic, on top of several camp-wide lectures and electives from some of the smartest people in all of debate. The scholars lab ends with a tournament so you get a lot of debates in there, but the real fun starts in the skills session. You and a few other kids will get a lab leader or two all to yourselves to have practice debates, supplement research, talk about theory, arguments, anything. And the skills session ends with ANOTHER tournament. Imagine leaving camp with 4 trophies (usually some sort of mug or thing sykes picked up from 7/11)

     

    2 questions...

     

    1. How many people are there per dorm?

    2. If I have a friend who is going and doing the LD camp, am I able to share a dorm with him?

     

    1. There are typically two people to each dorm. As far as I know we’ll be in Bruce again this year which has two beds, two desks, a sink and two closets in each dorm and a hallway bathroom.

     

    2. There is a section on the application for roommate requests. I’ve never been denied a roommate request, but this is something you’ll have to leave to the discretion of camp directors.

     

    But go ahead and apply anyway, you’ll have time to hob-nob with LDers even if you aren’t in their room.

    • Upvote 1

  4. Hey, this is dan from Stephen F. Austin BR

     

    The card in our 1ac tagged "And, the plan lowers global oil prices. This uniquely checks back Russia’s new play for power dominance." is cited as "africa news, january 5, 2007" in the casebook. This location no longer hosts that card.

     

    The correct cite in the 1ac is

     

    Dike, 2006 (Victor, CEO, Center for Social Justice and Human Development (CSJHD) Sacramento, California, Feb. 23," Niger Delta Crisis is a Serious Matter!," http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/...us-matter.html)

     

    sorry about that


  5. We make this argument in every 2AC on T, not because its an actual counterinterpretation of what debates should be about on this topic, but because it serves two important functions in tipping the T flow to the aff. First, it allows you to wax poetic about how arbitrary competing interpretations is as a standard for evaluating topicality because there are an infinite number of arbitrary interpretations one can make to exclude any affirmative.

     

    It also puts the neg in a double bind that i think is more effective than the other "double-binds" mentioned above, and that's when it comes to the role of the ballot on topicality--either the ballot sets a precedent to shape the size of the topic (which is what some negative teams will say you should do with the ballot, to punish the neg or create a trend against running nonT affs) which means after the round, your interp solves limits the best because everyone will listen to the precedent set by the ballot and run your aff only, or the ballot doesn't actually shape the way people chose to run affirmatives, so there's no reason to vote on T as long as you're reasonably topical...


  6. Here are some things I wish someone had told me to bring/realize before camp:

     

     

    SURGE PROTECTOR with as many outlets as possible. In lectures, outlets are in high demand, expanding the number of people who can plug in will prevent violent conflicts and is a nice way to make friends. Also comes in handy in your dorm room when you want to plug in your laptop, printer, microwave, TV, cellphone and X-box (And your roommate's laptop, printer, microwave, TV, cellphone and X-box)

     

    Money. Lots of money. Cafeteria food varies in quality no matter where you are and you will inevitably need to buy tape, scissors, timers, batteries, food for that hot girl/guy in your lab, etc.

     

    Headphones and backup headphones. 4 hours of debate work in a silent room with the only noise being 40 other people typing furiously can make you go insane.

     

    Double whatever the "supply" list says on the website for whatever camp you're going to. People will steal your scissors, tape, paper, pens and toiletries (especially with a community/hallway shower situation) inevitably.


  7. I'm gonna admit, I have talked some mad shit about UIL debate for a long time.

     

    I really enjoyed this year though. The diversity of the judge pool gave me the oppurtunity to debate in ways i never thought i would be able to. I got to give a line by line of the 1ac in the 2NC, which was really fun. I got to debate and lose to Steven Murray on Xtra T again. I got to debate in rounds where each judge had a different method of evaluating the debate, which forced me and my partner to come up with new ways to engage their arguments while appealing to all three judges.

     

    And, everything Murrell said is both true and important for everyone who plans on debating at this tournament to realize. There are no oral kritiks after the rounds and there's no open CX, but I can't think of a tournament that runs on time better than this one. I understand the Nazis kept the trains running on time too, and however much Lawrence and others hate punctual trains, the tournament directors deserve all of our gratitude. Given the size of this tournament and the various attitudes and preferences of all the coaches, students and regions represented in the pool, the tournament officials do a superb job of making this tournament run smoothly for everyone.

     

     

    Special congrats to Mr. Murray and Jeffery Xu for winning the 5A tournament and to Bellaire for valiantly defending the invasion of Darfur and winning second place, to Bay city for winning 4A finals and crosby for winning second.

     

    And Deer Park. If there was a emoticon or interwebzors acronym for a standing ovation, i would type it here.

     

    dan

    • Upvote 2

  8. This is As close as i could get to typing up the arguments made in the Finals Round.

     

    Affirmative is Bellaire (people who want to send US into Darfur)

    And Westwood (Murray and Jeffery)

     

    They start off with a quote from a survivor of the Rwandan Genocide about the UN leavng them.

    Person in Rwandan Genocide

     

    Genocide is a big publc health concern

    Encyclopedia of Public health XX

     

    Plan Text: The executive should deploy military based in djabouti to Darfur (close but not exact)

     

     

    Contention Two: Western Drive for Genocide

     

    There are no more refugee camps, just death camps.

    Batista in 2005

     

    Claiming lives of over 200K civilians

    Pol readings(?) XX

     

    Raping and killing vllagers

     

    Curent policies rooted in racit that sees them as less than human

    Abakwa XX

    Refusal to intervene leads to genocide in other regions

    X 2006

     

    Slaughter with impunity especially if protected by the Chinese

     

    Genocide will lead to other bad shit like war

    x 2003

     

    Warrant: Hitlers genocide =ww2 Bosnia=Haven for islamic

    Us policy makers make it a garden state for genocide.

    Total 96

     

    This one doesnt relly talk about africa, just more bosnia cards about ethnic cleansing. Something about the "anti-geopolitical

     

    Observation 3: Never again

     

    The US military is uniquely suited.

    Brookner 04

     

    Unique supplies, technical supplies, Other nations will join in, cultural insensitivity

     

    Lack of intelligence in the status quo/soldiers are good at killing people (?)

    CNN TV (?)

     

    Operation enduring freedom made soldiers able to kill less experienced soldiers.

     

    Intervention sets a precedent

    Abakwa 2005

     

    This card actually talks about why the UN should intervene

     

    National security concerns are irrelevant, must put others first.

    Douger 96

     

    Religious cults and shit can kill people, hell on earth, US policy should be guided by interest abroad.

     

    Cross-examination of the 1ac

    Why vote affirmative?

     

    Its ethical for some reasons

    -Us policy

    -symptomatic of US policy

     

     

    Why is ethics a good idea?

    Only under our ethical framework can you achieve peace in the international system.

     

    Who determines what is the "right thing" to do?

    My personal opinion is saving Darfur genocide would be good

     

    If we win there's more deaths post plan, do we win?

    No, people in darfur are more important that everyone else

     

    How is this public health assistance?

    Encyclopedia of public health says its just public health

     

    Why is military action Key?

    Reves ev says humanitarian aid is bad because rebel groups can divert it.

     

    Why aren't we there now?

    The US supports the rebels against the governments.

     

    Is the Sudanese government good as per the 1AC?

    No.

     

    Then why stabilize them?

    Current policy prevents aid from getting to refugee camps.

     

     

     

    1NC

     

    PHA=disease prevention

     

    India Deal Good Disad (Global Warming)

    Bipart Link

     

    Case--

     

    Alt causality for US Security Paradigm

    Turn on genocide--HR=intervention

     

     

    Infinite obligation to the other bad

     

    2ac

     

    Topicality

    W/m--plan mandates public health assistance. This Means we're not FX

     

    W/m D is ph emergency--

    CDC

     

    c/i promot public health

     

    Only our interp deals with fundemental structures

    Cite missing

     

    Don't vot eon pot abuse

     

    Reasonability

     

    Theirs plus ours

     

    9. FX is justified

    Encyclopedia of PH has direct link

     

    India Deal

    n/u-- just increased aid

     

    N/l-Congress won't

     

    turn wpn 05 public support

     

    public standing key to agenda

     

    Turn-Democrats

     

    a. Sudan key to democrats

     

    b. Democrats key to agenda

    Salt lake review 07

     

     

     

     

    Case

     

    Perceptions--

     

    Abawka says we set a precedent now, this means we solve for the erosion of international human rights credibility. Selective enforcement like the disadvantage and kritik erodes human rights credibility.

     

    Zizek/himan rights

     

    1. We're colonialist now in darfur, we solve that

     

    2. Turn--we embrace something that rejects national security argiments

     

    3. Turn--refusal to intervene=complicit with genocide

     

    A2: You cause more wars--

    4. This is false, all other examples are just aid, not military

     

    5.Booker 04 says other countries would join in--especially AU-- this checks back alterior motives.

     

    6. we increase the AU role in Africa. This solves back.

     

    7. International coalitions would be better.

     

    8. Criticizing humanitarianism because of imperialism ignores opressed peoples.

     

    9. We win that we cause a mindset shift--Douger 96 says other countries would follow the US's lead in this human rights credibility stuff

     

    10. Reading biographical narrative of US policy is a self narrative that breaks down something or the other.

     

    steel 06

    • Upvote 2
    • Downvote 3

  9. 5A Quarters

     

    Westwood MX v. Some School XX

    Westwood PS v. Austin BR

    Bellaire FS v. Katy Taylor AM

    Bellaire LU advances without debating

     

    Semis

     

    Westwood MX v. Austin BR(aff)

    Bellaire LU def. Katy Taylor XX

     

    Finals

     

    Westwood MX v. Bellaire LU(Invading Darfur)

    • Downvote 1

  10. I made an error in judgement in bringing up an issue on cross-x.com that should have been brought up with coaching staff. For that I apologize. When I said we need to give clear lake the benefit of the doubt on this one, it was not meant to be an indicator either way of my confidence in my original accusation. Just a concession that it is pointless to continue discussing it. As far as irreparable damage to clear lake's credibility, etc, i think the community is smarter than that. People read over other's shoulders, etc all the time. Clear Lake has a long history of success; one that is obviously still continuing, given their success at TFA state.

     

    I hope there are no more hard feelings between any members of the Clear Lake Coaching staff of Debate team and myself or anyone else from my squad. If anything else needs to be done to repair that damage, let me know.

     

    rowedan@gmail.com

     

    dan

    • Downvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...