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

Re: David vs. David II


On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, David M. Delano wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, David A Bargatze wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, David M. Delano wrote:
> > 
> > > should you support any research that will be wasted. I don't see the big 
> > > school getting that big of an edge, because remeber small school do 
> > > research before the topic comes out as well and chances are that big 
> > > schools doing non-topic research will still have a bigger advantage as of 
> > > right now than small schools because of the volume thats being produced 
> > > is putting little schools behind. Iam going to be researching in the 
> > 
> > I'm a bit confused by your post.  First you say that big schools won't 
> > get that big of an edge, then you acknowledge that big schools already 
> > have the inherent advantage of being able to produce a larger volume of 
> > material.  The evidence gap between large and small programs increases 
> > geometrically over the course of the year.  It seems as if the supporters 
> > of the early release date believe that the gap narrows over time.  This 
> > would only be true if large programs stopped doing research at mid-year 
> > (something I don't see happening).
> 
> Iam saying that they won't have that big of an edge. Plus I will extend 
> by saying that later release date hurts for two reasons 1) school start 
> testing in clases at that time which take away from research assignments 
> which would be jump started in August. 2) you practicly have to committ 
> suicide to prepare for the early tournaments teams with all of that 
> generic crap will be running it. An early release date Alleviates this 
> because research begins earlier. Plus there are stil some small schools 
> in NDT that are competitive with a release date in July. 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > is putting little schools behind. Iam going to be researching in the
> > > summer and I hate wasting my time on non-specific research. Plus 
> > > institutes will help small schools because now that evidence will be more 
> > > topic specific. Big schools will always have an advantage. Furthermore in
> > 
> > If you hate wasting time on non-specific research, why bother researching 
> > before the topic is released?  (For that matter, if you see it as a 
> > waste, why do non-specific research at all?)  As for institutes helping 
> > small programs, I agree that any topic specific evidence would be 
> > helpful.  The large programs, however, would have all this evidence as 
> > well as tubs more from their own early topic-specific research.  The 
> > institutes will do very little to close the gap.  Even if my take on 
> > institute evidence is wrong, do we really want to make institutes an 
> > absolute necessity?
> > 
> First of all large schools get these tubs anyway and rounds will not be 
> cluttered with non-specific research with an early release dat. Well 
> institutes provide a necessary tool for many schools now especially 
> small programs and JC programs now anyway. Plus small JC programs and 
> these school will have alot of more useful evidence in their tubs.
> 
> 
> > Also, small programs often do not have the funds to send students to 
> > institutes.  What of the programs that not only don't have the funds but 
> > are comprised of students who have to work during the summer to afford to 
> > go to school?  How can we justify making it that much more difficult to 
> > compete?
> That me be true now. But do you want them to have these schools without 
> the funds for these institutes researching for NOTHING? I think NOT!!!
> 
> > 
> > > topic specific. Big schools will always have an advantage. Furthermore in
> > > the duration small schools that are close by can get together and 
> > > exchange evidence that the others don't have, which will benefit each school.
> > 
> > I have said all along that big programs will always have an advantage.  
> > That's the nature of the beast.  With this in mind, I see no need to 
> > artificially support them by allowing them to use their numerical and 
> > monetary superiority to an even greater extent than they do now.
> > 
> > As for coalitions among small programs, how is this different from the 
> > evidence swaps that have been occuring for years among programs of all 
> > sizes.  If it has not served to eliminate the current evidence gap, why 
> > should we assume that it would even mitigate the even larger one that would 
> > result from this proposal?
> 
> The early release date wen alleviate this because school can start 
> earlier and can get together for community research assignments earlier. 
> Furthermore, as institutes go some small schools can get institute 
> evidence through connections. Plus school that don't go to institutes 
> will get better research by starting earlier. 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > Finally I see better debates with an earlier release date.
> > 
> > I have no doubt that watching two powerhouse teams would be a joy to 
> > behold, but watching a horrible mismatch (which I believe would occur 
> > more) would be no fun.  Judging it would be even less so.
> 
> I would rather see a mismatch with good evidence than non-specific crap, 
> because either way you will have a mismatch, assuming your scenario being 
> true.  
> 
> > 
> > If we truly wanted good debate, then we would provide written copies of 
> > all plans and positions well in advance of any debate.  Everyone could 
> > then research very specific evidence and we would have some real clash.   
> > Analysis of the evidence would become more important than than the card  
> > war.  We wouldn't have to worry about "wasting time" on non-specific  
> > research.  Alas, although this happens on some occassions, it is not the 
> > norm across the board.  I must assume, therefore, that our concern is not 
> > truly "better debates," but rather better debates only to the extent that 
> > it doesn't significantly damage our competitive edge.  Why should CEDA's 
> > smaller programs be expected to sacrifice themselves by giving the 
> > larger programs an even larger competitive edge?
> In the end with an earlier release date  small school will not be carried 
> out to the lions like you believe it will be better. I come from a small 
> school and I and the majority of our squad see it similiarly.
> 
> Respectfully Dave Delano Chico State Debate.
> p.s. Better Research will preserve the environment :-)
> 
> > 
> > Respectfully,
> > Big Dave
> > 
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > David Andrew Bargatze
> > President, Calhoun Forensics Society
> > E-mail: dbargat@hubcap.clemson.edu
> > Web Page: http://www.eng.clemson.edu/~dbargat/index.html
> > 
> > If you're going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance.
> > 
> > 
> > 
>
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page