View Full Version : On-Line Tornaments
05-07-03, 10:23 PM
I am feeling really bored and unchallenged lately I am in fact in withdrawal only instead of puking and curling up on dingy floors and such I am annoying my "normal" friends with "serious" stuff when all they do is quote kevin smith and watch art movies that they get at hollywood video and laugh with there jumbo jacks and sensory deprovation courtesy of lynch or someone with a last name much cooler than mine (Try it;) and iaugh with them i'm not sure what at.
and i love it during the week between debate
it's been too many weeks...well...1 week....but still
im all about on-line debates (and/or tournaments) w/ us (defined as here on NB if facilitated or thorugh some other fairly easy on-line mechanism.)I think we would only need 2 teams and 3 judges to have one or we caan do alot or whatever i'm just saying at this point its a cool idea and if we put our heads together we can pull this together (what with all the logistics and stuff that i never really did get good with) so yeah....gimee a fix before i steal your wallet......
Will C :freedom
Well why don't we start small... Try having someone moderate and give a resolution, then another post a case and then let everyone rip into it. If that works then maybe you can impose some structure on the discussion and then maybe mass producing some "rounds" or threads.
I'm bored too...
05-14-03, 05:38 PM
Ok Erik here's a challenge.
We need to get a panel of 3 moderators/judges (Amy,Phil and Jason come to mind as a good panel). Do a virtual coin flip to decide which side we are on respectively. Have them each propose a motion. (perhaps we could do the flip in real time on yahoo messenger w/ Amy moderating, (assuming she's willing), Then opp. strikes first gov. strikes second and we debate the motion that remains. We then each get alternating constructives (length of which I am not concerned with as I trust both of us will be reasonable in the overall length of our analysis and I would further argue that pissing off our judges is a check against being overly long winded.) And then one summation statement each after the two constructives.
We can probably finish a round in the span of a day. And have our panel render a decision and critique. The only "rules" would be an agreement to respond ourselves and not consult evidence or other perspectives once the topic has been decided upon. (I trust you)
This works as a starting point with you and I going one on one.
Personally I think it would be funner if we did it the same way as stated above only we partner up and challenge say Matt Contreras and a partner of his choosing or any other two debaters willing to participate.
At that point we could each get a constructive, be allowed to consult eachother and perhaps set a time span for the completion of each of our statements. Either way it sounds like a lot of fun and I could certainly use the practice. My e-mail is email@example.com and am on yahoo messenger under the handle fakepopart. You can get in touch w/ me either of those two ways or just reply here.
05-14-03, 05:57 PM
if people are willing, except, Will, can you please get AIM instead of yahoo? I think more people have it.
05-14-03, 07:05 PM
word limits on IM, then saving and posting the debate?
that way, we can preserve clash.
05-14-03, 07:26 PM
Word limits on Points of Reality
I cant think of a word limit number....but im sure Jason and/or Amy can come up w/ a reasonable length. Dan Franke and I just had a chat and have agreed to re-form our partnership for these debates. So there is now an official challenge put forth to any two indivduals. I for one trust Jason and Amy (who to my knowlede have agreed to judge) along with perhaps Patty who I sent an IM to (serving as a third judge) or someone else who wants on a panel to set word limits and time table for responses. Hey Erik get a partner and lets rock.
Lemme get Jeff in on this... Might take a day or two...
Word limits are tough but there are two ways I can think of:
200 words per minute is what I believe to be the fast coversational tone x minutes per speech as in traditional format. That would mean no abbreviations (man I wish I could be that economical with my words)
Or we can just be restricted to number of arguments (gotta make 'em count).
My problem with AIM is that suddenly your typing skills matter and I'm an awful typist. I guess abbreviations could make up for it... I dont know...
Whatever is fine, I'm game
Alright so Jeff's enthusiasm is lukewarm. He is pretty busy for the summer (he has a "real" job). Anyone else want to give this a shot? I normally take the PM and MO.
05-15-03, 01:23 PM
I for one am totally ok with Jason administrating.
I think 3 judges w/ each submitting a topic and opp. striking first. W/ some sort of coin flip. Erik as soon as you get a partner Dan and I are ready for battle. So to get started you need a partner and we need 1 more judge.
05-15-03, 05:08 PM
Dan Franke and I are on board as an entry.
I apprerciate you being willing to facilitate this I am in agreement with Jed, this could be very cool. I will advertise to some friends from the community in the NW who aren't on NB yet. I'll also post on the Parli-L. More the merrier eh? Dan and I want Owens and Wilkerson in Round 1.... :lol
So are we gonna just skip right ahead to a tournament or have a round? Is there enough interest? I don't see anyone else posting, "Hey I'll play!" besides Will and I.
Cross ex is cool... 5-7 questions sound reasonable? How would follow up questions work?
05-15-03, 06:57 PM
Erik Dan Franke and I are prepared to debate you and a partner of your choosing as soon as you A. Get one and B. we get a third judge
05-15-03, 08:07 PM
05-15-03, 09:22 PM
If Erik still needs a partner I'm up for it, particularly as I'm usually LO and MG ;)
edit : 9 months and counting in Japan has destroyed my ability to distinguish consonants with the same sound. Hopefully I'll do better in the round.
Announcement: Will, if you read this here before I talk to you personally, I figured out what I have to do in the next month or two, and unfortunately debate is not a priority.
First, I want to scotch any rumors of my doing online debate over the summer. I have a ton of things to catch up on over the summer, not least of which is German study and work, and I don't want to get committed to something like an entire tournament.
Come to think of it, I have to talk to Will about this trial debate as well. I have no time in the next two weeks, and after that it is two weeks to finals, so I might have to pass on the whole deal. This quarter's tournaments have put me seriously behind in my schoolwork, and being a gpa freak I take that seriously.
My apologies for building expectations before assessing feasability (you would have thought I could have done that, policy, etc.). But this whole thing seems to have gotten very large, very fast.
05-16-03, 11:17 AM
I'm down with teaming up with Patrick. But now we are still left with 2v1... I imagine we have to make the rounds "smaller" if we want more people to play. It takes away from the challenge but too many people actually have stuff to do over the summer.
05-16-03, 03:05 PM
me and JohnHrabe might be interested, but i probably wont have AIM for a while, so that presents a problem. Plus, i've always wanted to type out a big no-spaces, no periods, no punctuation Schlag/Normativity K.
oh oh, hey, can we have team names too? since this is informal, that would be really fun. Me and John will be known as "One Love". yeah, that'd be cool.
05-16-03, 03:40 PM
ah, its just cause i had a big football friend in texas named "Carlton" who made everyone call him "One Love". he was really big, so our names in his honor, john.
05-17-03, 02:12 PM
I wish I still had the cum sheets from the debate camp practice tourney. Now those were some great team names. Jeff and Jenni from Cal as Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, I think..Colin Murphy and Jon Lang as Space Cowboy and the Gangster of Love... The award for most juvenile yet amusing went to Bo and Arun of UF as My Dixie Wrecked- extra fun because they broke so Bob Trapp had to say it out loud. Hee hee.
Dre (Bikini Kill/Team Eat Me)
05-18-03, 08:02 AM
Got Dan's message so I am in the market for a partner. Will get back to you all next week.
05-19-03, 10:09 PM
I gather this is to be a tournament on AIM in almost real time as opposed to a correspondence event here in NB? If so, I'm willing to partner with anyone who needs it as long as we can work out a schedule. As an alternative, we could use threads in this forum, 24hrs per response and abide by word limits as set by our administrator. We could use AIM for pre-round formalities (i.e. coin flip and topic selection) then PM has 24 hrs to post case in this forum, LO has 24 hrs to post reply (LOC) and so on and so forth. It would take a little longer than trying to do something in AIM but it might allow more people to participate. I'm normally MG/LO but in past incarnantions I've debated in every position. Let me know.
05-20-03, 01:52 AM
I am on board with this being on NB instant messaging is a bit hard to pull off. I am also on board with Jason preparing and administrating this so that it might not get out of control. And it might take a little time, however I believe Jason to be fully capapble of making this fair and fun. And he has shown a willingness to give of his time and do it so we should let him.
Jason Ian Samuel and I are a team now.....watch out!
05-20-03, 02:01 AM
Works for me. Gives teams a chance to prepare. And for us to get the publicity out.
05-20-03, 05:36 AM
Plan sounds good to me. This seems like something worth putting the time in to prepare right. Can we maybe open a thread for those people who aren't well networked to meet up with potential partners?
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.