College Policy Debate Forums
April 27, 2015, 07:34:33 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: IF YOU EXPERIENCE PROBLEMS WITH THE SITE, INCLUDING LOGGING IN, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY.  EMAIL ME DIRECTLY OR USE THE CONTACT US LINK AT THE TOP.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register CEDA caselist Debate Results Council of Tournament Directors Edebate Archive  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Today at 06:12:33 AM 
Started by kevin kuswa - Last post by atwoodruff
I'll start some discussion with a question or two, but first of all thanks for the work you put into writing this paper- it's incredibly thorough and well-written.

1) My biggest concern relates to the question of uniqueness, which the paper never really addresses. In the section where you outline two possible affs, the evidence you include for Belarus says

"To the International Labor Organization–
Continue urging Belarus to cooperate and implement recommendations..."

and in the Zambia's section you say

"Today, an abundance of efforts are underway through the ILO in Zambia..."

And that is followed by evidence that lists a bunch of stuff the ILO is doing already. This seems to me like this would be a problem for the negative's ability to generate uniqueness for disads where the link doesn't depend on solvency (which is what my second question is about).

The major possible aff (discussed in the paper) that does seem to have solid uniqueness is the ILO reform/collective responsibility aff, but that aff has its own problems. Specifically, there's no way to target that action to a specific country/industry- maybe that's not a bad thing, but the paper seems very focused on producing specific debates about previously ignored countries which this wouldn't seem to allow. To bring this to a question, how do you think status quo efforts affect the negative's ability to generate unique offense?

2) I alluded to this in number 1 (and it's definitely related), but virtually all of the disads discussed in the paper require aff solvency to generate links. This seems like it could make being negative really hard in certain situations. For example, an aff that says the ILO should ask Turkey to pressure Belarus (asking other countries to pressure was an example of a possible aff listed in the paper). Belarus says no so your DAs don't link, but Turkey looks awesome for taking a leadership role. I'm curious what your thoughts are about ground based on the mechanism rather than solvency.

Best,
Austin

 2 
 on: April 26, 2015, 05:21:50 PM 
Started by Neil Butt - Last post by Neil Butt
Are final ADA point standings available somewhere? Last year they were posted here, but I didn't want to presume...

 3 
 on: April 26, 2015, 03:17:44 PM 
Started by hansonjb - Last post by hansonjb
the draft of the ndt rankings report is now available.

http://www.ndtrankings.org/

please doublecheck it and email me any errors at jim@climbthemountain.us
--do so by Thursday, april 30

the final rankings report will be posted shortly after the 30th.

 4 
 on: April 26, 2015, 01:02:18 PM 
Started by tuckerboyce - Last post by tuckerboyce
Attached below


Tucker Boyce

 5 
 on: April 26, 2015, 08:53:26 AM 
Started by kevin kuswa - Last post by kevin kuswa
attached.

 6 
 on: April 23, 2015, 10:16:25 PM 
Started by kevin kuswa - Last post by RobGlass
Kathryn Rubino, Joe Patrice, and I are working on a proposal based on "The United States should withdraw from one or more of the following treaties...". We're proposing NATO, the UN, NAFTA, the WTO, and the OAS as a foundation, but are looking to leave the final list to the wording committee.

If anyone else wants to contribute, feel free to backchannel me.

 7 
 on: April 23, 2015, 01:38:52 PM 
Started by kevin kuswa - Last post by BrettBricker
A few of us are working on an Israel proposal.  We are still collaborating about language, but topical affirmatives will (at least) be able to pressure Israel, remove diplomatic support/cover or slash military assistance.

 8 
 on: April 22, 2015, 11:38:15 PM 
Started by Laureny610 - Last post by Laureny610

MPOLY Language Institute is looking for debate teachers/coaches to teach at our campuses. We are a private institute that has several campuses around Korea.  We teach our students debate skills and, for the more advanced debaters, we try to take as many to tournaments as possible. 

Teach Debate in South Korea

The candidate should meet one of the following criteria:

  Have been competitively successful in collegiate debate.

  Have a bachelor’s degree or graduate-level experience in communication, rhetoric, and/or media studies.

  Employer: Korea Poly School, one of the largest, most reputable educational companies in Korea.

  Compensation: This may vary a bit depending on the campus

  Contract: one year, with re-signing opportunity based on performance.

  Salary: 2.6 million Korean won (about $2500/month) minimum. Negotiable based on experience.

  Severance pay: equal to one month’s salary upon successful completion

  Travel expenses: round-trip ticket provided by the employer.

  Housing: provided by the employer. (utilities excluded)

  Health insurance: 50% of expenses covered by the employer.

  National pension: 50% covered by the employer.

  Working conditions: About 8.5 hours of work each day.  break included)
 
  Teach mostly debate and a few writing/speaking classes.

  Coach students (to victory, if you continue our current streak) in national tournaments

  Work with a diverse group of Koreans and native English speakers.

  To apply for this position, please email your cover letter and resume to

Ms. Lauren Yun,  Korea Poly School at laurenyun@koreapolyschool.com

 9 
 on: April 22, 2015, 05:40:48 PM 
Started by Luis M. - Last post by Luis M.
Hello amig@s, this is a highly unofficial announcement: CSU, Fullerton will soon be looking for a Director of Debate to begin instruction and coaching in August 2015. The primary qualifications are that the candidate should have an M.A. in Communication Studies, a minimum of 2 years of coaching experience in policy debate, experience in hosting tournaments, ability to interact with culturally diverse students and faculty, and a commitment to travel. The Director of Debate is also assigned argumentation and other courses in the department. The contract will be for 1 year and is renewable. Official call will follow.

The HCOM department is extremely nice and welcoming and the students are amazing. I want to get a feel for people that are potentially interested in this position. Email me as soon as possible if you are interested and if you have any questions (dadoubter3000@gmail.com).

Extra bonus: you will get to work with Gabriela Gonzalez and Berenice Delgado!!!

 10 
 on: April 22, 2015, 03:37:37 PM 
Started by Jonathan Paul - Last post by Jonathan Paul
Georgetown is now accepting applications for an Associate Director and Coach of Policy Debate. The link to the application is here https://jobs.georgetown.edu/PD.php?posNo=20142106

This is a full-time position with a competitive salary and an outstanding benefits package. Please contact me if you have any questions.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMF customization services by 2by2host.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!