homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:04 pm
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 82
Home Schooled: No
I am worried that the China vote will be split between topics 1 and 3, then we will be stuck with the retirement program topic that most voters didn't really want.

From STOA USA:

Dear Team Policy Debaters,

THANK YOU! This year we had some incredibly well thought out topics and ideas to choose from, as well as many well-argued opinions on the style of resolutions. When you weigh in, we listen. Here are a couple of preliminary items the committee considered in resolution selection this year.

1. Foreign and Domestic Together. Many of you asked for international topics this year, so we included those in the mix.

2. Unidirectional and Bidirectional. Many expert voices in debate believe unidirectional resolutions (e.g. "the U.S. would increase engagement towards China") provide for better debate, while others believe the open bidirectional resolutions are preferable (e.g. "the U.S. would change it's engagement towards China"). For the first time, we've included both!

Resolutions
1. The United States federal government should increase its engagement toward the People's Republic of China.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... -relations

http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/why-2015 ... relations/

http://thediplomat.com/2014/11/us-china ... fter-apec/

China was the most submitted topic by Stoa membership this year. The Resolution Committee agreed that U.S. policy with China is a timely topic that is ripe for exploration. As the rise of China’s influence challenges American hegemony, the world is watching to see how the two powers will co-exist in the amorphous geopolitical landscape of the 21st century. Researching the inherent controversy in the topic will allow debaters to go deep as well as broad into U.S. China relations. Debating U.S-China engagement will also press debaters to research and understand trade policy, military ties, diplomatic relations, the East Asia Pivot and China Containment policy among a myriad of other relevant issues facing the two countries today.

2. Resolved: That the United States federal government should substantially change its policy toward one or more private or federal retirement programs in the United States.

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... cy-in-2033

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/ssa ... retirement

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues ... -security/

Managing the needs of an aging population is one of the most salient policy issues facing the U.S. federal government today. Retirement spending comprises a whopping 23% of federal spending in the status quo and is likely to increase as the Baby Boomers rotate out of the workforce. As debaters delve into the wealth of available literature, they will find that there are serious provable harms in the current system with a plethora of viable policy solutions to explore. Case ideas include abolish or reform Social Security, reform Federal Pension programs, Chilean model of Social Security, reform policies regarding IRA’s, 401k’s, or Money Purchase plans. A year spent exploring the economic ramifications of caring for an aging population will prove challenging and educational for Team Policy debaters.

3. The United States federal government should substantially reform its trade policy with one or more of the following nations: China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan.

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/tpp/

http://www.cfr.org/trade/us-trade-policy/p17859

https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free- ... /korus-fta

This resolution also gives a nod to membership support for a topic that included China. However, limiting the debate within the parameters of trade and including Japan, South Korea and Taiwan elevated this topic to a favorite of the combined Resolution and Team Policy Committees. The topic is broad enough to allow debaters to explore a multitude of cases regarding U.S trade policy, while researching and gaining a deeper understanding of the geopolitics of the Eastern Hemisphere. Under this resolution Stoa debaters will likely explore WTO commitments, biotechnology, sanctions, child labor tariffs, foreign direct investment, and public/private securities holdings among other fascinating and relevant policy options.

_________________
The NCFCA board has just announced that they will create a grand army to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:47 pm 
Offline
Hint hint peoples.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:18 pm
Posts: 1378
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: San Diego, California
Since I'm a mod, I'm going to make this thread also be the hub for discussion on the Stoa Spring Member Vote 2015 in general. :) Here's the official Stoa page. My initial thoughts, subject to change:

(1) Monologue vs. Poetry? Hmm, monologue sounds cool, but difficult to stretch out to fit the time limit. I am a sucker for poetry, so I'll pick poetry. That, and it's an established event in college forensics, so aspiring poets can see some (hopefully clean) college poetry speeches for inspiration. (I say that because poetry tends to be one of the most...erm, "morally dubious" events in college, if my sources are to be believed.)

(2) WHY STOA WHY are you forcing members to litigate between OI and Storytelling?? Just merge DI with OI, as DI is a dying (pun intended) event, and bring back Storytelling. But since we're forced to choose, I'd pick Storytelling over OI simply because I like Storytelling's format better.

(3) The LD resolutions are a no-brainer. Neither of the two "artsy" resolutions appeal to me at all, especially #1 - ick. Resolutions #3 and #4 all the way.

(4) TP resolutions: I personally like the third TP resolution the best. To date, I don't think we've had a foreign policy resolution which stipulates "one or more" countries, and that would be interesting to see play out in rounds. #2, while a good resolution, would probably get boring and technical fast - abolish Social Security would probably be the case every other round. Oh yeah, that reminds me: rez 2 seems waaayy tilted to the AFF.

_________________
http://www.ebsd.us/

As the deer pants for the water brooks, so pants my soul for You, O God. -Psalm 42:1


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
http://www.stoausa.org/membership/sprin ... icy-debate

1. The United States federal government should increase its engagement toward the People's Republic of China.

2. Resolved: That the United States federal government should substantially change its policy toward one or more private or federal retirement programs in the United States.

3. The United States federal government should substantially reform its trade policy with one or more of the following nations: China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan.

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:05 pm 
Offline
is jealous
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 8:50 pm
Posts: 224
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: climbing in yo windows, snatchin' all yo people up
LD:
Rez 1 - Please kill me now.
Rez 2 - This one, while a bit on the artsy side, could actually be kinda interesting because of the impacts on the educational system.
Rez 3 - I like it, but because of some Conservative judge bias, it might be a bit too Aff-tilted. Marine Natural Resource policy year had that problem, and this would kinda be a repeat of that.
Rez 4 - I think this one's at least got some potential, without researching in-depth. Decent ground on either side, and could lead to some good discussions of whether or not it is right to punish the citizens for the sins of their government.

TP:
Rez 1 - China's a great topic, there's plenty to talk about here and it wouldn't be dull.
Rez 2 - Please no. For the same reasons Evan stated, this would just be really awful.
Rez 3 - Probably my pick for now, since it includes some of the discussion that would happen with rez 1 and also has other countries to discuss as well. Not too broad, since it's trade-only, but still broad enough to be interesting. :)

Wildcard:
I personally like Monologue better, since it would help competitors learn how to better develop interping skills that wouldn't rely on rapid-fire changing of characters. Learning how to fully develop one character and make him/her be interesting aside from action helps form acting skills that one would need to be an actor/actress.

Replacing OI with Storytelling:
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Sorry, but OI's way too popular of an event to do that, as much as I love Storytelling. Kill HI or DI instead, not one of the most popular events. That would be like killing impromptu all over again. :lol:

_________________
Elizabeth Danford | Alumni


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:39 am
Posts: 39
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Everywhere!
Okay, putting in my two cents here:

First: Why STOA... OI is so much better than Storytelling. Storytelling was hurting us as a smaller region and we were all excited to see it leave. It takes up to much space, and just generally does not benefit anyone. I would not of protested to it taking over DI a much smaller event but replacing OI is problematic. The use of a chair in an OI... it will be extremely awkward.

Also the new speech events replacing what was an awesome powerhouse event of Broadcasting is *drumroll ... Those. Really. Both of them look quite boring honestly on face value and the rules do not make it any better. Monologue is literally DI or HI with more rules and no character changes. (Something that can already be done) and there is no rules against poetry in any of the interps. I understand the need for a new event but why not do without a new "wildcard" and keep broadcasting? The popularity was there and it honestly is a great experience for a number of people.

On Team Policy:

I honestly am a fan of Res 2 and here is why.

1. Does NOT use the word substantially. Meaning I could run an AFF case sending a single US Marine to snipe a terrorist located in China and that would be topical... Squirrel Cases are incredibly real. I also don't find it that interesting of a topic because it is so broad. Engagement is a weird enough word and could lead to some crazy T presses. Let's not.

3. Was alright but lets be honest guys. That resolution is just going to become Taiwan/China support against each other trade wise. Or some random squirrel cases. There is not a whole lot of real debate happening and not really widespread.

Now.

I will be the first to admit 2 does not sound attractive on its face but I believe it allows for better debate because, 1 it is specific enough yet broad enough for a decent amount of cases without to many squirrels. and 2 It contains the classic check against squirrels in the form of the word substantially and it will lead to real debate. I think the judge bias on this resolution is quite a lot less. When it comes to these programs people may have certain opinions but facts and good presentation could help change that.

Thoughts anyone?

_________________
2012-2013 Calderwood/Hoopai (State Semis)
2013-2014 Calderwood/Hoopai (State Champs and Nats) (Parli)
2014-2015 Calderwood/Fredericks (State Semis Everytime and Nats) (Parli)
2015-2016 Calderwood/Sneddon (Parli) (LD)

Founder of Pangea Sourcebook
http://pangeasourcebook.com


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2015 11:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 82
Home Schooled: No
Team Policy topics.

Squirrels will always happen. The question is with which squirrels are you prepared to live?

Topic 2 is terrible. We all heard those same justifications for the marine resources topic. What happened? We had to hear 2-3 different plans for catch shares, every 3rd round or so. This will be the same, except it will be 10 different ways to reform/abolish social security: abolish, raise the benefits age, raise the benefits, eliminate the tax cap, ugh. Or we get to debate another minor reform on a smaller, lesser known retirement program. You don't think squirrels will happen there? Perhaps a plan text about some minor contractors retirement package over which the USFG has any jurisdiction . . . the judges will want to stab their eyes out. Do you want to debate in front of bored judges or engaged judges? Give them a chance, please. Judge recruitment is enough of a challenge already.

Topic 1: Perhaps, can still be tweaked to include substantially. "Engagement" is a legit term of art in the actual political science literature. If it was changed to policy, you don't think squirrels would still happen?

Topic 3: Nothing going on in trade policy for those nations listed? You should click on the links. Aside from that, those are dynamic economies. South Korea and Japan's economic health are vital to the stability of that region. It's better than debating about an obscure retirement package about an obscure union.

China is the best choice. The only question is which China topic.

_________________
The NCFCA board has just announced that they will create a grand army to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Apr 18, 2015 2:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
Pangea_Sourcebook wrote:

On Team Policy:

I honestly am a fan of Res 2 and here is why.



1. Last time I checked significance is still a stock issue, so they couldn't pick something small cause it would fail under that. In fact that's why I always consider substantially an unnecessary word in any rez. I thing not including it in this one will lead to less crappy topicality arguments.

Doubleturn already addressed Engagement.

2. It's not so much I think #2 is a bad rez it'd just that it's domestic. We've had domestic topics two years in a row now. We are over due for an international topic. Plus I think international is just a more interesting debate then anything domestic could ever offer.

3. As one of the people that submitted a china topic I've already done a lot of research on this. China is a rich topic area with a multitude of case grounds ranging from military to economic. Even trade policy is broad enough to encompass aspects of things like environmental regulation. Trust me I would of even be able to write a 20-something page essay if this wasn't a good topic area.

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 82
Home Schooled: No
STOA responded quickly to the wording concern. I love this league!

Topic 1 now reads as: "The United States federal government should substantially increase its engagement toward the People's Republic of China."

Can we all figure out which China rez to have, please?

_________________
The NCFCA board has just announced that they will create a grand army to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
Doubleturn wrote:
STOA responded quickly to the wording concern. I love this league!

Topic 1 now reads as: "The United States federal government should substantially increase its engagement toward the People's Republic of China."

Can we all figure out which China rez to have, please?


Right so I think topic 1 is the best of the two. I don't think 3 is bad, and I'll vote for it if thats where public opinion is heading as to not split hte vote.

First, topic 1 allows for more depth. Instead of the attention being spread between 4 countries debater will focus exclusively on the details with china. I think this will be more educational because debaters will leave this topic with an in depth knowledge of US-Sino relations. Also it will make the research burden easier and make it fairer for negatives.

Secondly, topic 1 allows for more breadth. While trade policy isn't just economic and cuts across a wide array of issues, topic 1 would deal with them more directly. Debaters will be writing cases about everything from intellectual property rights to environmental regulation. Affirmatives will have no trouble finding a case.

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2015 4:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
Member Comment Pages Open: http://www.stoausa.org/news-and-announc ... tpagesopen

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 8:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 82
Home Schooled: No
STOA Friends and team policy voters,

I have been in communication with different clubs and here's what there is.

1. Voting for topic #3.
By a wide margin, Veritas CA elected to throw its TP topic votes to pick #3. Our LD and speech people are going to vote that way too. It seems that Paradigm, Doxopolis, Touche, Kairos, and Skagit Defenders are going to side with pick #3 as well. Thus far, that's a lot of votes for #3.

Leaning toward resolution #3, but only a maybe are: Gopher Hill, Mars Hill.

I am still waiting to hear from some other clubs in WA and CA, but the early returns signal a strong topic #3 preference

2. Splitting China votes leads to topic #2 wins.
The goal for the pro-China voters is to not split the vote between two China topics. If you believe that debating retirement policy is not the way to go, the mutual goal should be to not split the pro-China vote.

3. Voting flexibility.
If it looks like other clubs are going for topic #1 by a wide margin, Veritas is willing to switch to support topic #1. I ask other teams to have the same flexibility. If it looks like #3 it going to win, please switch your votes to support it.

I will update as more information comes in, but it looks to me like the pro-China voters need to rally around topic #3 to avert a Social Security season.

4. Let's poll and see

I want confirmation from people that are authorized to speak for their club. If you club seems split, that is also relevant information.

If Travis Herche's blog post is any indication, he is pulling for topic #3 as well. Does that mean Response is breaking for topic #3 as well? I will let everyone know when I do.

_________________
The NCFCA board has just announced that they will create a grand army to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 6:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 82
Home Schooled: No
VOTE TOPIC #3!

After asking and searching around on Facebook, Google+, HSD, and the STOA resolution page, here is what clubs are reporting and who reported it:

Topic #3:

Doxopolis, Jordan Bakke
Kairos, Audrie Ford
Paradigm, Justin Holiman
Skagit Defenders, Grace Evans
Touche, Elizabeth Danford
Veritas, Eric Garcia
Verve, Philip Beasley

Leaning #3:
Gopher Hill, Amanda Chang
Mars Hill, Audrie Ford
Parle, Abel Tirado

Topic #1:
Apollos (?)
Valor (?)

Split between 1 and 3:
Clash, Alison Lindsay

Split between 2 and 3:
Response, Katie Herche

Okay, it looks like West Coast teams are pulling for or leaning towards #3. I don't know what any other clubs are doing. I believe strongly that the pro-China voters need to come together on topic #3 to avoid splitting the vote and enduring retirement debates that many of the topic #1 supporters also want to avoid.

_________________
The NCFCA board has just announced that they will create a grand army to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 5:55 pm 
Offline
Hint hint peoples.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:18 pm
Posts: 1378
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: San Diego, California
Doubleturn wrote:
Okay, it looks like West Coast teams are pulling for or leaning towards #3. I don't know what any other clubs are doing. I believe strongly that the pro-China voters need to come together on topic #3 to avoid splitting the vote and enduring retirement debates that many of the topic #1 supporters also want to avoid.


I agree. I can't speak for Valor, but I for one am voting resolution 3. BTW, you keep posting what Mr. Garcia posts on G+ - are you Coach Garcia from Veritas? If so, hi :)

Also, I've changed my mind on the OI vs. Storytelling issue, as I've been made aware of issues I didn't know before. Mostly the fact that Stoa completely changed Storytelling from how it used to be, which I don't like. So I'm voting to keep OI - it's a bad choice to replace the most popular interp event with a lame version of a good Wildcard. Like I said, the way to make interps better is to change the stringent word limit rules and kill DI, not kill off OI. It'd be akin to the Olympics voting off wrestling, or Stoa voting off Impromptu. Oh wait. :P

_________________
http://www.ebsd.us/

As the deer pants for the water brooks, so pants my soul for You, O God. -Psalm 42:1


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 2:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 82
Home Schooled: No
Noah Hackendorf is my hero for pressing the big wigs on their justifications for their resolution preferences on things like unidirectionality and domestic topics. Everyone should be reading that STOA thread.

_________________
The NCFCA board has just announced that they will create a grand army to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 12:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
Doubleturn wrote:
Noah Hackendorf is my hero for pressing the big wigs on their justifications for their resolution preferences on things like unidirectionality and domestic topics. Everyone should be reading that STOA thread.


Thank you kind sir!

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 7:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
ShaynePC wrote:
Link?


http://www.stoausa.org/membership/sprin ... icy-debate

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2015 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 5:42 pm
Posts: 21
Home Schooled: Yes
The vote for next year's resolutions is up:
http://www.stoausa.org/news-and-announc ... 2015isopen

_________________
Psalm 40:2 He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

Stoa NC

2012-13 Hackendorf/Smith
2013-14 Hackendorf/Herrera
2014-15 Hackendorf/Young


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:19 pm
Posts: 123
Home Schooled: Yes
Which resolutions won?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:40 am 
Offline
is jealous
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 8:50 pm
Posts: 224
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: climbing in yo windows, snatchin' all yo people up
LD:

Resolved: In formal education liberal arts ought to be valued above practical skills.
Resolved: Developing countries ought to prioritize economic growth over environmental protection.

TP:

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially reform its trade policy with one or more of the following nations: China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan.

Monologue is the new wildcard.
We're keeping OI.

All of these voting results make me endlessly happy :D :D :D

_________________
Elizabeth Danford | Alumni


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited