[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: Gonzaga vs. Emporia at Heart
> > As the member of the tab room who is changed the ballot, I fail to see
> > why you think we did anything wrong. First, Trond indicated to me that
> > Gonzaga had won the debate (ie, "the better debating was done by. . .").
> > Since that was not how the ballot was turned in to the ballot table, it
> > was changed. In fact, Trond even came down to the tab room to find out
> > what all of the fuss was about. HE didn't think it was a big deal. He
> I must admit that I did not Trond came down to the tab room to find out
> what was going on. I know that two people in the tab room came down and
> asked Trond. I may be wrong I never said that Trond wanted it another way,
> I just thought he did.
It seems to me that this should clarify everything. Trond did not want
to vote for Emporia. The ballot reflected a win for Emporia. It was
changed to reflect the judges' desired result.
> > wanted to vote for Gonzaga. The fact that the tab room recorded it that
> > way shows no error. In fact, why do you think the tab room made an
> > error? You provide no reason except "From what I heard. . ." Are you
> "From what I heard..." I heard it. It wasn't secondhand I was there
> and listened to what was going on. I think the tab room made in error in
> that they did not ask Trond to write out the ballot or something to that
> effect. It was to my understanding that Trond didn't want to search out
> the ballot because he wanted to let the decision stand. maybe I'm wrong, but
> I think the tab room should have made him record the decision instead of
> recording it themselves.
Why would Trond have wanted the ballot to stand? He thought the better
debating was done by Gonzaga, yet the ballot stated Emporia. The tab
room clarified who Trond wanted to award the win to, and then changed
what Emporia had written on the ballot. Furthermore, what is so
important about the ballot? I can certainly remember "Everyone gets 30s,
the better debating was done by Gonzaga." The purpose of the ballot is
to avoid confusion and misreporting of decisions. In this case, the
ballot was not needed. The decision was given DIRECTLY to the tab room.
> > serious? Heard what? And from who? And why does that mean the ballot
> > should not have been changed? These are the questions I have. Second,
> And they are all answered above.
> > the fact that Trond did not want to seek out the ballot does not indicate
> > his unwillingness for the ballot to be changed. It only shows that Trond
> > did not want to spend his afternoon looking for where Emporia may have
> > left the ballot. I don't blame him. The campus is pretty big.
> I see what you're saying but I think you are wrong. Maybe I'm wrong,
> I just felt that the tab room should have told Trond to change the ballot.
Answered above. I see no reason for the ballot to have been changed by
Trond. He reported the decision to the tab room.
> > The larger question is whether or not we should allow debaters to turn
> > ballots in to the tournament. It seems to me that judges are in charge
> > of the ballots. Those turned in by debaters should be verified. In this
> > case, that is exactly what the tab room did. We found out that Emporia
> > had committed a fraud against the tournament. THEY turned in a ballot
> > which did not reflect the decision of the judge. For this reason, the
> > tab room feels no remorse for what it did.
> Again I do not dispute that maybe students should not be allowed to turn
> in the ballot, but I feel that Trond should have been made to turn in the
> ballot, and seeing as he did not, the decision should have stayed the same.
Why should it stay the same when it was the opposite of what Trond wanted?
> Also, I disagree with the method by which the fraud was discovered if Trond
> had told you that Emporia had filled out the ballot in the first place, instead
> of Gonzaga telling the tab room, then half of my criticism would go awat, but
> since the tab room on the advice of Gonzaga decided to seek out whether or
> not there was fraud, I feel the tab room intervened in the debate.
Gonzaga did not report the error until after the change had been made. I
was told by one of the KU debaters at the ballot table that Emporia had
turned in a ballot. Since this is rather unorthodox, I went to find out
what had happened. After Trond was done deciding, and he had packed up
his things, I asked "how should the tab room record the debate?" He said
that "Everyone gets 30s, Gonzaga did the better debating." Since this
was different than what was turned in, the tab room changed the ballot.
In order to clarify, I asked Trond several times. In fact, I went back
in to double check. He told me he had made it perfectly clear.
I hope this clarifies what happened. If anyone has any comments or
complaints, I would welcome them. My guess is that this will not be the
first or last time a team attempts this trick. It seems rather important
that the community decide what it thinks is the appropriate response from
the tab room. KU's position is clear: judges, not debaters, should
turn in ballots. Does anyone disagree?
University of Kansas.
> > By the way, enjoyed having everyone in Kansas. Sorry I won't be able to
> > make it to the awards ceremony in San Diego. Good luck to everyone at
> > Nationals.
> I really enjoyed the tournament myself. The free food was very good.
> Thank you very much for having us, I hope to come back next year and actually
> compete this time. Thanks again for all the work and dedication you put into
> running such a fine tournament, which is quite easily among the best I have
> BTW I just want to remind everyone that the ideas expressed w/in this letter
> are my own, and that I amvery capable of error. In fact Trond may very well
> disagree with the way I interpreted his decision and I might be wrong.
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page