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

Re: Merger

> The forensics division at Western States Convention held an open forum
> to discuss issues pertaining to a reconciliation of NDT and CEDA.
> Following the discussion, we were asked to write our views on the CEDA-L
> to "hopefully" continue a dialogue.  So here goes...
>
> There are several reasons that a merger is unlikely and unwise.  Initially,
> CEDA does not represent only the interest of nationally travelled programs.
> It seems to me that we have discussed the merger only from the perspective
> of those individuals who "do" debate consistent with NDT.  I think that
> it would be unwise and divisive to deny individuals an alternative type
> of debate.
>
Greg, this ignores all the reasoning that has been covered here for
over a year. Do you read any of these postings? Why do you make the
automatic assumption that merger would result in NDT-style
homogeneity? If the smaller regional circuits are packed with schools
practicing "alternative debate" (whatever that is!) why wouldn't
teams showing up for their tournaments have to adapt to the judges at
those tournaments? Merger wouldn't deny anyone anything. It simply
reduces the absolute ridiculousness of trying to maintain the
artificial separation. Regional tournaments would still be different
from national tournaments, just as western NDT tournaments are
certainly different from NDT tournaments back East. Your rhetoric of
merger as a means of denial to those on the regional circuit has been
abandoned by most of the former advocates of separation on CEDA-L.


> Second, it will never happen.  Beyond the arguments of hierarchy, topic
> and governance, we are left with a community who will never vote for
> and/or accept any real merger.  Given the debate over mutual preference
> judging, we are part of a community that seems to reject any practice
> that is remotely consistent with NDT.
>
Hogwash! I'm sure glad the founding fathers (and mothers) of our
nation didn't embrace such pessimism. Greg, just look at the changes
here on CEDA-L. Look at CEDA voting on an NDT topic. Look at CEDA
adopting policy topics. I disagee with your survey of the community.
Everything I see points to more and more people recognizing the
foolishness of maintaining two separate, but equal, debate circuits.

> A number of other arguments were made, but I will let those individuals
> explain them.
>
First, real progress at changing outdated and outmoded attitudes is
possible. Second, why the pessimism? Why, if you believe these
things, did you try to move your own CEDA program to NDT three years
ago? Is your severe pessimism a reaction to this attempt? I just
don't see what you think is accomplished by promulgating such
pessimistic creeds.

Bear




Michael "Bear" Bryant           Internet: mbryant@central.weber.edu
Director of Forensics           Home:   801-399-4253
Department of Communication     Office: 801-626-7186
Weber State University          Fax:    801-626-7975
Ogden, UT  84408-1903
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page