[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Response to Murphy on NEDA

If Mr. Whitney meant "Lighten up tom" directed at you instead of me, then I
stand by my post--most of my responses would apply, if I were you.  I think
you have been reasonable and justified in your criticisms, as well as your
responses to my posts.

I have in fact been backchanneled by several from NEDA with valuable
information on this debate, stood by what I felt still held water, and
retracted from what I didn't believe once I received correct information
and sound reasons.  At the same time, I have also been backchanneled from
those who either have or are in the process of being, from their accounts,
capriciously or arbitrarily excluded, to the point that I KNOW my posts and
yours are not merely special interest pleading.

But like every other form of debate NEDA deserves a shot--exclusionism and
splintering do not.  I'm in this discussion to discover the extent to which
these things exist, because they have no place in the broader community--as
I say, everybody may not make elimination rounds, but everybody deserves a
shot.  As I've alway quoted Coach Richardson from Arkansas Basketball, our
goal as coaches and educators should be to create opportunies, not deny
them.

So I will repeat one of your challenges for response--I feel some dialog
cannot help but be interested and helpful:

"Prof. Preston has obviously received posts from some NEDA person(s).  I
challenge them - publicly put NEDA's philosophy to the test and RESPOND to these
criticisms in this or another public forum.  Of course, failure to do so will
only solidify what I have argued concerning NEDA's intolerance of other debate
forms.  When I last checked, I know Larry Underberg was on the -L.  How about
it, Larry?  Or Virginia Chapman?  Gary Horn?  Anyone? Anyone?"

I also repeat the following paragraph, from my earlier post:

"I challenge NEDA to offer and sanction a division, run by its rules by one
of its leaders or founders (as I noted earlier Finton or Horn would do), at
Part I of the Gateway Debate Tournament, Nov. 2-3, 1996 (NOT to be confused
with the CEDA and NDT divisions we will run Nov. 15-17).  This would enable
a long tradition of experimentation to continue over what has become a
regional event (all told 12 coaches will be involved in running the entire
tournament), and will enable us to a) learn more about NEDA; b) allow us to
see how NEDA fares in the marketplace of debate.  Who knows, it might
flourish like nfald and parli, one of which burgeoned into a quarters
division and the other into octas--after only two years! Lets give it a try
here!; c) create a good competition opportunity, in an ideal location, for
those who do feel that NEDA best serves their educational interests in
debate."

Again, the reason I'm offering Nov. 2-3 as the opportunity instead of Nov.
15-17 is that the CEDA/NDT--the seventh leg of the Jesuit Swing--is already
expected to take up all the rooms--and that, folks, should tell you
something right there.

But in the tradition of experimentation at UM-St. Louis--one of the few ie
tournaments with duo improv (over 50 entries every year), radio
broadcasting (the only event where a tape comes to compete--cheapest hotel
cost around--with over 60 entries annually), comedy (well only about 15
brave this event, but its finals make for a great time at the party
Saturday night)--and next year--Original Interpretation!

Sometimes experiments fail (sorry but no more officiated debate,
declamation and argument analysis at the ole Gateway, folks) but sometimes
they succeed.  So whaddaya say, NEDA?

Why not give the Gateway Clientele a shot?

A letter will go out to NEDA officials offering this Monday.  I will make a
similar offer of a novice event in conjunction with our novice tournament
Dec. 7.  Interesting will be their response--and I will let everybody know
what it is, since I feel that it will add to how we talk to new programs
about the extent to which this organization is exclusionary.

We know one thing is for sure--NEDA debate is valuable to some extent--(I
can't evaluate it because like many others I'm kept in the dark).  If its
not desirable, then we don't have much to worry about it--stick with
NDT/CEDA/Parli and share the facts in Mr. Murphy's post with everybody else
new to the activity so that it will go away, as well as offer scholarships
to deserving transfers (who will be totally eligible for CEDA points since
they are not transfering, in most cases, from a CEDA school--but check the
membership lists because some still subscribe to CEDA!)  If it is
desirable, then any exclusionary rules should be considered undesirable by
the debate community to the extent that we should be creating, not
restricting, the opportunities of the students who make us as coaches.

So from this private citizen, the olive branch is there.  Last year, 62
schools from 22 states attended the Gateway, and over 350 awards were
divided among the well over 500 students.  That's thanks to our loyal
patrons, our splendid tournament staff from many schools, and location, not
me.  So by any stretch of the imagination, this could be a wonderful
opportunity for many to see what NEDA is all about, as well as for NEDA
officials to discuss their ideas with others.

The Henry VIII will once again be the host hotel for the CEDA/NDT
tournament Nov. 15-17--more plugs for that Monday.  The rooms with (lots)
of evidence and work space will be a paltry $49.00 per night, plus
outrounds down the hall from your sleeping rooms Sunday!

Exciting hotel information for the parli-nfald-(neda?)--ie tournament Nov.
1-3 coming Monday as well--probably an awesome holidome, with a whole list
of amenities unprecedented at any Gateway.

My letter goes out Monday.  We'll be watching. . .


Tom "I'll offer any event you want me to" Preston
UM-St. Louis
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page