topic area vs. harm area

[texwms@asu.edu]

i have a few problems about the way the current discussion of the topics 
is going.  it is necessary to analyze more than just how one feels about 
the merits of the harm area.  now for my rantings...

1.  most of the discussions have centered around the merits of discussing 
the problem area, rather than the merits of the debatabiltiy of the 
topic.  people feel that they have a personal mission to choose their 
particular topic (including myself).  however, these discussions have 
degenerated to the point of name calling.  my second problem with this is 
that these threads have not only been devisive among the community, but they 
have people comparing the harm areas against one another.  for instance, 
people are saying that we shouldn't look to solve human rights in seasia 
if we can't solve for civil rights in the united states.  what kind of 
bologny is that!!!!  that not only undercuts the work of the writers of 
each topic paper, but also takes away from the merit of the problem 
areas.  if people want to vote for a topic area because they have a 
personal stake in it go ahead and vote your conscience, but don't make me 
feel that i'm less concerned about the world if i don't vote for your 
topic.  i don't understand how someones personal interest in voting for 
civil rights should overwhelm my interest in wanting to learn more about 
certain treaties and how that effects international relations.  that's 
the problem with the discussion so far...most people are basing the 
discussion on the merits of the harm rather than its implications as a 
debate resolution for competitive purposes.  in the end the side benefit 
of the topic may be some new level of knowledge, but lets look at the 
topic area for what it is--something to provde  for a fair balance of 
competition (i.e. amount of predictable ground and focus of an aff. plan 
mechanism).

2.  when people are voting for the topic areas, don't just vote for it 
as a problem area.  vote for the topic that provides some level of 
predictable ground and a focus of the plan action.  all of the topic 
areas do this in some respect, thus the thing that should most sway your 
vote for the topic area is which topic area best meets those two standards.

don't just vote for a problem area because you like it, vote for it 
because its limits the aff. to a specific action and provides some level 
of predictable ground.

tex williams
asu

---

• Prev by Date: Re: suggestion for the topic committee
• Next by Date: denny's resteraunt
• Prev by thread: Topic area selection
• Next by thread: denny's resteraunt
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

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