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

Re: CEDA "culture"

Monte Stevens sez:

"On Thu, 27 Feb 1997 DRTUNA@aol.com wrote 
> The CEDA culture is one of a larger community and of being a bit more open
as
> a result, perhaps, than NDT. Time and again I have heard people from NDT
> programs say "don't bring that out in public." What I want to know is, why
> not?

What does this mean? Cultured CEDA people are more "open" (with their 
mouths?)? This is divisive and, frankly, asinine."

I am surprised that you are not aware of more than one meaning for a word, or
culture vs. cultured. The point I am making is that I have noticed that CEDA
folks are more likely to bring "rumors" out into the open to confirm or deny
them. I base this on reading all of the listservs since they began. Feel free
to disagree if your sample is different. It is not divisive. Understanding
differences helps us understand each other.

Monte continues:

"> I salute Josh Hoe's commitment to openness in our activity.

Hey Tuna, let's try making the activity really "our" activity, i.e. to 
include all debaters, and not just those of the culturally refined 
acronyms. Whatever you mean by "open" applies to everyone now; whatever 
"closed" might mean applies to the attendees of both the CEDA and NDT 
Nationals. The attempt to make a distinct debate "culture" out of an 
acronymic affiliation is separationist."

Despite your desires, differences exist. We ignore them at our peril. "Open"
vs. "closed" applies to people, not acronyms. Over and over again I and
others are told not to bring things up on the L but to let them lie. Why
don't you try dealing with that (whether we should or not) instead of
posturing. I do not understand how my affirmation of Hoe-ish openness is
refuted by your above comment.

"FUCK CEDA, FUCK NDT: LONG LIVE DEBATE"

Your crude language fails to hide your innocence in this matter. If you
believe that academic debate in America can prosper in the absence of
effective organizations then start running an anarchy counterplan.  Please
support the argument that we don't need organizations. Where would topics
come from? Who would organize the two nationals tournaments? I bet you would
be the first to complain when they were poorly organized because they were
simply throw-together affairs.

Send this message to someone else, Monte. I and others made the shared topic
possible. I spent months fighting for my constitution and bylaw revisions
which made it possible. I fought for it at business meetings while you were
cutting cards or fast asleep somewhere. As well, I have tried to show respect
and understanding for all formats of debate. Do you feel the same about parli
as policy in your exhortation for long life?

Sure, I am in favor of cooperation, crossover, and all the rest, but I will
not bow to a new god-myth that in order to do that I must remain silent and
blind to differences which I feel need to be discussed or addressed.

If you believe this, then I expect you to prove it by refusing to accept any
awards from these organizations that you wish to "fuck." I'll be watching.

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