tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.comments2023-11-03T04:50:28.780-07:00Debate BallotsMichael Antonuccihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08131310751971005948noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-89442924812894047922009-07-16T06:14:32.213-07:002009-07-16T06:14:32.213-07:00thanks, and that'd be awesome if you posted th...thanks, and that'd be awesome if you posted that video<br />i just want to say that Georgetown posting all the videos online was pretty awesome, so thanksAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15605502043846417031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-82815629293156367092009-07-14T23:13:47.653-07:002009-07-14T23:13:47.653-07:00Camp is where you make gimp and sing Kum-Bay-Yah. ...Camp is where you make gimp and sing Kum-Bay-Yah. We have a seminar. :)<br /><br />I don't really think they're "innovative." I guess I introduced the spreeder to debate, but I didn't invent most of this stuff. <br /><br />General: don't overdo drills. Alternate 30-60 seconds of drill with 30-60 seconds of reading. That way, you can make your own determinations about what's improving your speed and clarity.<br /><br />Specific:<br />1. Spreed for raw speed. www.spreeder.com.<br />a. check variable - adjust for word length<br />b. don't paste in text with lots of numbers (eg sports stats) - spreeder won't give you enough time to read those because it reads 123, say, as a three character string even though it's four syllables.<br />c. Work your way up.<br /><br />2. Overarticulation for clarity. Open your mouth when speaking and bear down hard on consonants. I think it is useful to do this with a pen behind the incisors. (Front tooth, front tooth, incisors - it's the sharp vampire tooth.) Some disagree. Judge for yourself.<br /><br />3. Backwards or a drill - Reverse the word order, or insert an "a" between words. Ideally, this should train you build in nanopauses between words, instead of issuing a solid wall of noise. Some believe it helps to train them to follow text with their eyes.<br /><br />I hope that helps a little bit. If you want, I can post a video demonstration on the Georgetown Debate Seminar website.Michael Antonuccihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08131310751971005948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-40479106967915013872009-07-14T17:15:07.333-07:002009-07-14T17:15:07.333-07:00this isn't really a comment on this debate, bu...this isn't really a comment on this debate, but in several ballots you noted how well your speaking drills were affecting the debaters' clarity. could you clarify - what "different" or innovative speaking techniques did you introduce to debaters at camp?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15605502043846417031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-60609931572572330522009-06-29T17:21:11.439-07:002009-06-29T17:21:11.439-07:00Not to be Mr. Hedges, but you have to decide that....Not to be Mr. Hedges, but you have to decide that. <br /><br />I do think that you should use "speed variability" under advanced settings. Also, avoid text with lots of numbers (eg if you cut and paste sections from ESPN, use Sports Guy not Hollinger) - the program doesn't distinguish between numerical and alphabetic characters so flashes "1139393" for a painfully short interval.<br /><br />As with any speaking drills, alternate between short drills and longer sections. I do 1 minute spreed, 1 minute normal, etc. That way, you can see if it's hurting or helping. Everyone has a slightly different reading style.Michael Antonuccihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08131310751971005948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-5624955815546161862009-06-29T17:10:51.420-07:002009-06-29T17:10:51.420-07:001. Capitalism unsustainable. I think this is cruc...1. Capitalism unsustainable. I think this is crucial, and almost always helps more than it hurts. No - make that always. <br /><br />Let me put it this way, in the most practical terms. I've seen negs lose on "transition is bad" and "transition is impossible" and "aff outweighs" - all of which I think can be answered, in part, with collapse inevitable.<br /><br />I've never seen a neg lose on "your transition inevitable claims minimize your impact." Never. Ever. Independent of the truth value of your claims, I'm way on the right side of the stats on this.<br /><br />I think that the big impacts are still in play - capitalism's sustainable in the short term, and it can do a lot of damage before its collapse. <br /><br />ANALOGY: It's a rabid dog. Put it down.<br /><br />2. Role of ballot:<br /><br />I think the neg should explain the judge's preferred role. That doesn't mean that your K is a T VIOLATION - it doesn't auto come first BUT it should be PRIORITIZED. It's a WEIGHING argument, not a THEORY PUNISHMENT. <br /><br />("A subpoint: we define capitalist as current system, B. Violation they're the current system, C vote neg to preserve limits on capitalism." NOOOOOOOOOOOOO.)<br /><br />Also, what is this "worlds" stuff? Both teams are talking the same world - Earth. They have different filters for viewing that world and selecting political priorities in relationship to it.<br /><br />Sorry if blunt - just want to give my clearest answer to your questions!Michael Antonuccihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08131310751971005948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-20302876307239712502009-06-28T13:45:24.884-07:002009-06-28T13:45:24.884-07:00I noticed intrinsicness was an issue in this debat...I noticed intrinsicness was an issue in this debate.<br /><br />“In general, intrinsicness is a little dangerous for the neg, because the aff is just defending “logic” or a decision-making model, instead of crying like a hurt child.”<br /><br />I watched Nick’s lecture on intrinsicness, and when he started making the distinction between positive/ negative (logical) intrinsicness, I automatically started thinking “arbitrary!!!”. Is there a non arbitrary way to distinguish between positive/ negative intrinsicness (other than saying “politics disads bad” justifies it)? Otherwise, it seems like the neg could reply with an equally arbitrary counter interp, like “intrinsicness is bad unless you read CTBT because education about CTBT is good”, or something like that.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00104823749100955320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-50379979630139570552009-06-28T13:42:42.836-07:002009-06-28T13:42:42.836-07:00I have a couple of questions
Depending on the neg...I have a couple of questions<br /><br />Depending on the neg impact(s) to cap, do you think reading "cap collapse inevitable" can hurt the neg as well? Say the neg's impact is nuclear war from imperialism, wouldn't "cap collapse inevitable" also non unique the neg's impact too(unless they somehow proved that the timeframe for their impact was relatively short term)?<br /><br />To me, it would obviously help the neg when they're reading systemic impacts (like poverty or maybe value to life?) because they can quantify the benefit of a short term revolution versus the long term inevitable collapse of capitalism. Another way that it might help the neg is if you read the berry card that says a short term economic collapse is better than a long term one because of finite resources.<br /><br />My other question is about the necessity of having a "role of the ballot". Do you recommend defending the alt as a micropolitical strategy in the same world as the plan? Or should the neg make framework arguments and say the K comes first?<br /><br />I guess it would help if you would be more specific about what exactly you recommend the neg says in the block/ 2nr about the role of the ballot.<br /><br />Thanks, your comments are very helpful!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00104823749100955320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-84920993053716980982009-06-24T15:41:19.756-07:002009-06-24T15:41:19.756-07:00I notice you suggest using spreeder (www.spreeder....I notice you suggest using spreeder (www.spreeder.com i'm presuming).<br />How would you recommend the use of this website (what settings, ect)?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16920478804693104423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-36125037732760199382009-06-20T12:55:41.788-07:002009-06-20T12:55:41.788-07:00Mr. Antonucci.
I am almost sure that you judged ...Mr. Antonucci. <br /><br />I am almost sure that you judged Walter Payton and not Whitney Young...the names are easy to mix because we are both from Chicago. As a local school by them...I am aware of them running Heidegger and Consult EU very often with each other. <br /><br />I also don't quite remember being judged by you. I did enjoy and learn from this ballot however. <br /><br /><br />Just letting you know.Misael [John 12:24]https://www.blogger.com/profile/07861662528526411893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-23912895911335610562009-02-01T11:10:00.000-08:002009-02-01T11:10:00.000-08:00That's really interesting advice. I'll consider i...That's really interesting advice. I'll consider it. I initially thought it might be too much work, but decided you were probably right on a second thought.<BR/><BR/>It's a bunch of time - but I spend so much time judging. I'd rather sort of engage that requirement joyfully than just consider it lost time.Michael Antonuccihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08131310751971005948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-86877372035203578592009-01-31T17:33:00.000-08:002009-01-31T17:33:00.000-08:00this is too funny..I've heard debaters do this, to...this is too funny..I've heard debaters do this, too.Sandy Peekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04838118496561301672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-70153039872813040832009-01-31T17:31:00.000-08:002009-01-31T17:31:00.000-08:00I think this is a good idea. I think though, if yo...I think this is a good idea. <BR/><BR/>I think though, if you wanted to make this more useful for people to see how you voted in previous rounds, you should use a hefty amount of tags. That way, if I was coaching a team, and wanted to see your thoughts on Agamben or whatever, I could go here, and tap on an agamben tag, and find you are more often to vote on the perm for whatever being as an alt vs. everyone becomes homo sacer as an alt (or whatever is true). <BR/><BR/>Anyway, that's my only advice. And good luck keeping the posting going, I don't think I would have the stamina for this project.Scuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17156611887819008603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-46708181362194596422009-01-31T16:14:00.000-08:002009-01-31T16:14:00.000-08:00Me too! I hate the metaphoric use of "literally."Me too! I hate the metaphoric use of "literally."Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16528178827290036399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2839986040166310976.post-88605497167960915462009-01-26T18:10:00.000-08:002009-01-26T18:10:00.000-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248239471393028238noreply@blogger.com