Re: Defining "out of context" - a thought or two

[Hovden Jan M <jmh358s@nic.smsu.edu>]

First, I think Ken should apologize to me for thinking that I would try and set
some one up with that card.  And yes it was ambigious, thanks for stumbling
onto that fact :-)  I can't type , so when I can cajole Trice into it I might
try and find a card to discuss later.  I still think that should be our focus
instead of whining.  All the great self claimed minds on this L and only 2
people wrote in. I guess yammering is more important than getting anything
done.  Has the L become the Ceda Exec meeting  :-) (Personally, I never been
to one but I guess I could really stir things up if they would let me speak
:-)))

Enough of me Being Me!  On e thing I don't like is this tangental (is that a
word) discussion on can we punish someone for ethics violations? (Not that
anyone will ever agree on standards for what lying actually is)  I think that
we can point to codes for writing such as rules determining plagarism to set up
guidelines and appropriate corresponding punishments in the debate context.
If a team won't give up a sacrificial lamb, punish the squad, if the squad is a
repeat offender, punish the team.  My point is the punsihment can be assessed,
it is the crime we are having trouble with.         --Sean--

---

References:

• Defining "out of context" - a thought or two
• From: DEFOREEST@GONZAGA.EDU

---

• Prev by Date: Re: What I believe in...
• Next by Date: Re: Evidence and ethics
• Prev by thread: Defining "out of context" - a thought or two
• Next by thread: Is this card in context
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page