I would argue that it's a perfectly common sense rule that competitors in competitions don't cast bets on what they're competing in. It would even violate Biblical principles because you aren't treating the people you compete against fairly. You put them in a precarious position because of your bets, which isn't right.
That's cool that you don't feel comfortable betting on your competitions, but it is a huge stretch to make that a blanket statement. Betting does not give any competitor an advantage. If there is a lot of money at stake - NFL, MLB, NBA - there can be a problem with betting if it is not managed properly. But in the context of NCFCA it is no worse than two businessmen betting on a golf game at the country club. People have friendly bets like that all the time.
Actually, I've heard stories of people in the audience trying to distract debaters that they don't want to win.
Also, a friend of mine got her case stolen at one tournament. It never showed up.
Totally different. I know that people try to distract debaters in rounds and I think those people should be dealt with because unlike betting that can actually effect the outcome of a round. That has nothing to do with my statement about organized criminal syndicates using betting and match fixing to launder money
Actually, the leadership of NCFCA does read what we post here, and that's most likely why Mrs. Hudson dislikes HSD. Because of offensive talk about the league. I'm certain that the leadership is fine with constructive talk, but not festering insults, which does happen quite infrequently here. We just have to be careful.
Oh trust me, I'm aware that Mrs. Teresa reads HSD
. But it is naive to think that leadership would be more open to change if people stopped complaining on HSD/social media. NCFCA is not and has never been a democracy. Policies are going to be made the same regardless of what happens on HSD.
Actually, at Regionals in 2014, a guy from our region was disqualified for throwing an octas round to qualify his friend to Nats. What's funny is that he still won the round, even with throwing it, but because they disqualified him, his friend was able to qualify.
The justification was that he wasn't performing his best, which is against the mission statement or debate ethics guidelines or something. So, he could have just forfeited the round and that would have been fine, but debating below his ability wasn't acceptable.
So, the penalty for trying to help his friend qualify was that his friend actually qualified?
. Only in NCFCA would that make sense
. That is a new development, but its enforcement makes even less sense than kicking people out for betting.
I'm pretty sure some NCFCA participants are already heavily involved in mafia. buh-bum tssk.
I realized that as I was typing