4 ms·

A "vested interest"? You got me, I am a paid shill for Big Debate :) There is a lot on this page about what modern debate is and isn't. It's not supposed to be

A "vested interest"? You got me, I am a paid shill for Big Debate :) There is a lot on this page about what modern debate is and isn't. It's not supposed to be a mechanism for the exchange of ideas or advancement of understating; it's a game, with rules, and players who optimize performance within those rules. This, here, now, is a forum for the exchange of ideas and the advancement of understanding. Notice that neither of us are hyperventilating while trying to score a victory. I don't think the specific recording you posted is a fair representation of modern debate. Yes, the video presented modern debate in a terrible, terrible light. But, it was scant seconds of a performance which lasted how long? My point is that the material you posted to back up your opinion over-eggs the pudding to the extent that it undermines you. If you think modern debate is so bad, then an ordinary performance recording would make that point perfectly well, wouldn't it? The Atlantic article posted somewhere close to our discussion here talks about how black students are challenging the rules within the framework of the competitions themselves. These Towson(sp?) ladies seem to be an example of that. I found it a thought-provoking read which didn't suggest any obvious self-evidently correct solution. What did you think?

nnfy 9y ago
These were national champions. The news cast was a clip from national championship debate. I don't think there is a better representation of a subject than a clip which literally shows winners competing seriously. It is the first clip I found of what I remembered. I am using it as evidence of the state of modern debate, and I attest that it is typical championship behavior. I dont know what more evidence you need. I'll say it, I think you are giving the champions an excessive benefit of doubt because they appear to be underprivileged minorities. I dont know where that Atlantic article is, but I have a haunch that the trouble comes from giving minorities social privilege because of the color of their skin, and in doing so, avoiding any challenge out if fear of being slandered as a racist. Edit: I tracked the article down. It's even more absurd than the video, because it attempts to justify the degradation of debate, as though any change is good if brought about by black participants. That article is a joke. That whole tournament was a damn farce. The champions won by debating about something totally off topic. How is that acceptable? You think they would have won if they hadn't been black? Did you even read the article?

nnfy 9y ago

These were national champions. The news cast was a clip from national championship debate. I don't think there is a better representation of a subject than a clip which literally shows winners competing seriously. It is the first clip I found of what I remembered. I am using it as evidence of the state of modern debate, and I attest that it is typical championship behavior. I dont know what more evidence you need. I'll say it, I think you are giving the champions an excessive benefit of doubt because they appear to be underprivileged minorities. I dont know where that Atlantic article is, but I have a haunch that the trouble comes from giving minorities social privilege because of the color of their skin, and in doing so, avoiding any challenge out if fear of being slandered as a racist. Edit: I tracked the article down. It's even more absurd than the video, because it attempts to justify the degradation of debate, as though any change is good if brought about by black participants. That article is a joke. That whole tournament was a damn farce. The champions won by debating about something totally off topic. How is that acceptable? You think they would have won if they hadn't been black? Did you even read the article?