Tumgik
parliposting · 4 years
Link
1 note · View note
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Parliamentary is going national
That means less tech
🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀
1 note · View note
parliposting · 4 years
Photo
Tumblr media
Running theory like
13 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
hosts/hostesses at restaurants when 20 teenagers wearing suits walk in at like 10pm
Tumblr media
119 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Hey, let’s talk about debate a little bit.
I was a high school and college debater.  Lincoln-Douglas, parli, humorous interpretation, extemp.  I was on one of the top teams in the country.  (I was not one of the top debaters personally, I was just okay, but just-okay at a high level.  If you get me.)  I’ve got trophies in being an “um, actually” dude.
And this is why I don’t believe in the power of debate for settling serious issues.  Because teams alternate positions over the course of a tournament, but teams with better preparation and training tend to win no matter which position they take.  The whole sport wouldn’t work if the morally right side of an issue was always the one with the strongest arguments.
(In fact, being personally invested in the rightness of your argument is sometimes a detriment, because you can get flustered and emotional while the other guy is projecting nothing but calm confidence.)
I learned to speak passionately about why the US needs to retain nuclear supremacy for world peace, and also to speak passionately about why the US needs to lead the world in nuclear disarmament.  I can’t say “I can convince you of both,” because your own preconceptions are such a huge factor, but if you agree to be an impartial judge, I can absolutely convince you of both.  The “but in the end the truth wins out” factor is so much smaller than you’d like to think.
 This isn’t to say you shouldn’t ever engage in debate.  If you think you can win, go in and kick some ass.  It’s a valid way to present and defend your beliefs.  But don’t trust debate as a truth-finding process.  Don’t leave human welfare up to “whoever wins the debate.”  Don’t get sucked into believing debate is somehow a morally superior tactic to deplatforming or protest.  There’s so much style and technique involved in debate, it’s little better than saying “we’ll agree the truth is on the side of whoever wins this arm-wrestling match.”
Impartially moderated debate is a great college sport for people who don’t work out.  But there’s absolutely nothing sacred about it as a political process.
7K notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
How to refute “I told you so” like a west coast parli debater
Judge, during the PMC, my partner, the prime minister, laid out the affirmative arguments to support the passing of the resolution. However, in the LOC, the leader of opposition offered no rebuttals to the aff arguments aside from "because I said so."
Judge, this does not provide any logical refutations of the aff claim, evidence, link chain, or impacts whatsoever. For this reason, all of the aff arguments should flow through, meaning that they were dropped by the negation, and because of this, the negation cannot bring them up again in the subsequent speeches as they have already had an 8-minute speech to counter the aff arguments made in the PMC. Judge, do not let them do this, to do so would be abusive behavior and would hurt the fairness and education of the round, and if you hurt fairness and education you hurt the positives of debate and set a precedence for abusive behavior, ultimately destroying the debate space. For this reason, if they try to bring it up later, please drop them and sign aff on your ballot.
However, judge, while the neg team has the potential to commit abusive behavior, they have already committed abusive behavior due to the nature of their argument. To not drop a team for saying "because I said so" validates such a rebuttal as a legitimate response. Judge, saying "because I said so" has no logical basis whatsoever, and because of that it kills argumentation. When you kill argumentation, you kill the educational aspect of debate, and because the education aspect of the debate, along with fairness, are the two highest values we should uphold in this round, as they encompass debate itself and we can't have a debate without the debate space, please drop the neg team from this round on the grounds of using "because I said so" as a counter.
Judge, also please note that unless the neg wins on theory, you are obligated to drop them. Because we can't debate about the resolution without setting down rules for a fair and educational debate, theory comes before or is a priori to debate about the resolution.
4 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Noooo you can’t refer to the pro side as the opposition! Just because it’s an English class debate you can’t just change the norms like that! Noooooo!!!
3 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Conversation
Debater 1: God I miss debate social distancing sucks
Debater 2: You know there are online tournaments right
Debater 1: Yeah but I'm lazy and I don't want to do them
A few days later...
Debater 1: God I miss debate social distancing sucks
40 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Yeah, I don’t think people will be shaking hands with opponents or judges after this.
15 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
I just wrote a 4-page long RFD and I think the tournament event chair wants to kill me
9 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Link
There’s an online debate tournament being hosted through discord. If anyone is interested in joining, click the link to join the discord. Signup links are pinned under the postings and announcements tab. 
Deadline is 5pm EST March 25 2020.
0 notes
parliposting · 4 years
Photo
Tumblr media
1K notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Imagine flying across the country to participate in an intellectual clash of ideas in pursuit of a higher truth only to lose to some guy arguing about shoes
This post was made by the west coast parliamentary gang
10 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Columbia topics/motions for octofinals. Look at the second.
Tumblr media
20 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
Tumblr media
Motion: “this house believes that as a high school debater, it would not join high school debate.”
All 3 judges were college debaters. Rip.
Luckily they were objective, but we still lost to lack of warrants in the member of government constructive.
We ran how kritiks hurt debate by delegitimizing movements like feminism and lgbtq rights.
F.
1 note · View note
parliposting · 4 years
Text
What if we wore a face mask 😷 into a debate round about the corona virus? Haha jk...
Unless?😳😳
8 notes · View notes
parliposting · 4 years
Text
A wise woman Greta Thunberg once said, “save yo money, save the planet. Only bad b****es invest in solar tax credits.”
1 note · View note