Відео

I really enjoyed the episodes where you guys focused more on the argument analysis. Is there any way you guys can go over what arguments were most effective and which ones seem to be predominant (from your perspective)? What seem to be the common trends after the constructive speeches? How are students adapting mid round and what strategies are effective?

Enjoyed listening, wish I heard more about different Theory being used. Is it possible to make a video about how to construct Kritics or Counterplans?

So informative. Thank you.

I really miss NPDA style debate. I competed in it from 2009-ish through 2012-ish and coached it a little 2012-2014. I have considered having my debaters try it out at some tournaments that offer both Parli and LD.

If they get rid of flex ima straight quit the format lol. Flex is for 1. Strategic questioning not just clarity/ POI. 2. For when incredibly fast debaters spread and I genuinely just need 2 minutes to figure out what’s what. This is less of an issue now but there are a few very fast parli debaters

Guys wake up new debate sensei NPDA video just dropped

Will you be doing another analysis now that the resolution is public?

Like what if I just show up and make one cogent point, and then my opponent says a bunch of random words for their time. Do I just win automatically?

so what's the deal with the word salad debates, and the debates that don't even use words, and the totally off-the-wall stuff that uses no reason or facts of any kind?

Squidward on a chair

Love this song

Yeah, that music definitely goes with Mike Pence. 😂

Finals: Berkeley wins on a 5-2. Aff: ad1: defense against aliens ad2: tech sharing (soft power) Neg: Agency Spec Budget Tix with a floor time link scenario

It was 5-0 decision in semis, my ballot glitched and I was told to pick the side that won instead of the team.

the among us k will live on eternally

I do NFA-LD on a small squad (we only had one LDer last semester). I’ll admit I’m a bit biased because my coach judges a lot of NDT-CEDA, I’ve only been doing evidentiary debate for three years, and I care more about having good round than winning, but I loved having similar topics. There being more debaters reaserching the same topic greatly improved overall argumentation quality and I found a lot of good articles and books from CEDA-NDT files. I’ll admit I and other debaters stole some ideas from CEDA, but I don’t think it led us to do substantially less research. I get that having similar topics greatly rewards schools who do both and I understand why single event schools dislike that. I don’t know how it helps larger schools more; smaller schools probably benefit more from being able to more easily find good resources for research because of the CEDA files. I have mixed feelings on the time changes. I could see them making LD rounds better and think more experiments with them should happen. I often find myself wishing I could cross examine the 1AR or develop my CP more. Debate formats do kinda compete with each others for debaters and I worry that making LD longer would cause it to lose the main advantage it has over CEDA: shorter round and shorter tournaments.

But what is this f&n?? Or am I getting old people.

How can I contact you? I can give you some t-ips to grow your channel.

Your video is excellent.

Go Beach!

Thanks for the shoutout Deven! Much love and appreciation to you both for this interview - very insightful.

DEEEVIIINNNN‼️‼️‼️

our GOAT paul

keep making the content love it. however where is second half of video

Chad and Jared raise the issue of the old rule for full course citations. The purpose of this was actually super basic and practical when the committee adopted it. The Internet, as we know it now, was in its infancy in 1991 and most research was still conducted in libraries or on old school Lexis-Nexis. There was no Speech Drop and briefs were physically exchanged between debaters. It was necessary to be able to see the full citation in order to be able to track down those sources for opp research. The rule indicated that you had to provide the full citation the first time you read the source, but after that you could say "Smith, previously cited," which emulated the norm at the time in public address events. As the internet evolved and tracking-down sources became easier, this become less necessary.

Sometimes you really do need to have a few facts for an intelligent debate. Ironically, there are no CAFO subsidies in the United States. There haven't even been production subsidies on grains since 2006. There are subsidies on farmland, that serve to inflate the price of farmland and increase the cost of grain production, but those don't benefit CAFOs. CAFOs, especially for cattle, usually have a more diverse feed supply than smaller operations. That's mostly due to scale, as well as process efficiency. They can find the most economical source of protein, carbohydrates, fats, and fiber, and blend them into a balanced ration. That lets them efficiently use waste products from other parts of agriculture (cottonseed, soybean hulls, etc) that cannot be as easily used by small mixed operations. Oh, and cattle produce methane from fermenting cellulose. That mostly happens when they are on pasture, eating grass and hay. In the feedlots they are fed a more balanced diet with less cellulose and produce much less methane. Ah, good to hear that you know facts are irrelevant to a debate. They certainly are irrelevant to your discussion here. Animal welfare has many different metrics. From a physical health standpoint, animals in CAFOs usually have less disease and less death than animals raised in less intensive, less confined systems. On average, it's much less. The "mental health" question is much more questionable, but then you're really being anthropomorphic. CAFOs probably reduce the jobs associated with animal agriculture. They are very efficient in terms of human labor. Eliminating CAFOs would likely increase rural jobs. But, of course, eliminating farm subsidies won't have a direct effect on the number of CAFOs as they are mostly unaffected by them. The largest CAFO near me doesn't participate in the farm subsidy programs at all, even though they operate a significant amount of farmland to produce their feed and that farmland would be eligible for subsidies. They don't take the farmland subsides because they do come with strings and the CAFO doesn't deem the money worth the compliance hassles. The United States really should eliminate all farm subsidies, and I say that as a grain farmer who does take most subsidies for which I'm eligible. But eliminating the existing subsidies will have very little effect on the number of CAFOs.

I have judged a handful of the debaters discussed in this podcast. Each was definitely worthy of the recognition they received in it.

Another excellent episode! I shared some of this with my students already. Thanks for the great content.

As a new director, I found the information in this video to be invaluable. I learned so much about how I can better structure pre-tournament work, practices, and even picked up some tips about team file-sharing/management. This was great. If at all possible, I would love to see a conversation facilitated between NFA-LD and CEDA-Policy coaches to dig into the similarities and differences regarding research and argument strategy between the two formats. For example, the topics are very similar this year, but the videos on key authors demonstrated great differences in who is read and what arguments are cut. I am sure there are other areas of difference and similarity too. I think that would be an illuminating discussion.

Another helpful video!

This was an incredibly helpful video. I shared it with some novice debaters because the broad view provided on common affirmatives will be especially helpful for them to understand the differences between each. Great work as always!

So many of the arguments in favor of the Electoral College don't actually reflect what the Electoral College does. It doesn't "give a voice" to rural states.

💕 *promo sm*

Great stuff. Glad to see some NFA publicity. Now is a great time for it.

I'm Puerto Rican. Puerto Rico is never going to be a state and it never should. You guys are correct about a lot of stuff that's happening on the island. All those referendums are total BS, we do not want statehood. The referendums are only setup by the very corrupt pro-statehood party PNP just as a political ploy to bring more of their supporters out to vote for them, they always get very low turnout and are all non-binding. if you do the math with all the referendum results and turnout, really its like 30% that vote or statehood, but some of the people who vote for statehood do want independence but vote statehood because they are pessimistic about Puerto Rico being its own country. Puerto Rican statehooders do not want to join the US because of "Equality", "Representation", "Civil Rights", or being "Proud Americans", all that stuff is what the corrupt statehood leaders from PNP say when they are in DC at congress trying to get the US politicians to feel pity and makes then want to give statehood to the island. If you ask average Puerto Rican statehood supporters why they want statehood, its all about just getting more money to live on welfare and that statehood is a magic wand that will make all the islands problems disappear. But thankful more Puerto Ricans are waking up to these lies because of all the corruption exposed in statehood movement and neglect by the US government. For the first time ever in the 2020 elections the pro-independence party broke out o the single digits at 15% with their candidate Juan Dalmau and with the new party MVC their candidate was also pro-independence and they got a combined 30%, so support for independence is growing big time. Congress is never going to give the island statehood, all those politicians in DC calling for Puerto Rico statehood are just virtue signaling because statehood for Puerto Rico is being thrown around the US as if its some civil rights movement, when really the statehood movement is a bunch of greedy corrupt people. And when they get into office they pretend to do little for the island to solve the status issue but then they just let any bill that would do so die. They know that statehood would be detrimental to both the US and Puerto Rico financially, politically, and culturally. And no territory has ever been admitted into the union out of pity and only to fix the territory, and there is no "Right to statehood". I agree Independence if the way to go because its the only way out of this current limbo status. The thing holding Puerto Rico back is the pessimism that Puerto Rico wont function as an independent country, so many statehood leaders have brainwashed Puerto Ricans that Independence will automatically turn the island into a third world isolationist communist dictatorship. Another this is that with the current parties there is tribalism the same corrupt people keep getting elected because a lot of Puerto Ricans also see the political parties like sports, that's another reason why PNP the corrupt statehood party candidates keep winning even though there is news every month about politicians in their party being arrest for corruption. But still slowly the younger generation is turning away from all this and growing in support of independence. We'll see what happens in the next election net year because the MVC and PIP parties are trying to form an alliance. Also if the PNP loses both the governorship and the legislator, then Puerto Rico being a tax haven for rich Americans to dodge taxes is going to come down. The governor Pedro Pierluisi and his administration are open about only using the tax breaks as leverage to bring in more rich Americans to pay less taxes to pressure congress to make the island a state and they know the tax breaks are not helping the island. Me personally, I want independence because of all the craziness happening in the US and to keep our culture. If we become a statehood, it wont fix the islands problems, its just going to bring the problems in the US to the island, and overtime we aren't going to be a Latin island state, we are going to become just some other state and lose our uniqueness. Puerto Rico is a Latin island nation with its own history, culture, and Spanish is the dominant language.

Make such videos more, informative plus it's 1D babyyyyyyy🤪♥️

Both sides went into this without a single thought about the collateral damage to people within their industry and innocent businesses outside. Each willing to sit back and blame the other for the fallout and hardships they have caused. The unions even have the audacity to point out some of the suffering while begging for public support as if they had nothing to do with it. This has nothing to do with the public that has been paying for a substandard product for well over 5 years. This is between the studios and the unions. The consumer was cut out long ago. This has all happened before... text vs film, silent vs sound, radio vs television, celluloid vs digital, practical vs FX.... on and on an on. Whatever happens it will go on. New will rise up to fill gaps or even replace the the old. Life goes on and changes happen.

This song is timeless, Marvin was a genius, far beyond his year, the man had such insight, I am up in age now, and I still love this song and the message,❤🎉

THA GREATEST ALBUM EVER 🙌 WHAT'S GOING ON RIP-SIP MR MARVIN GAYE 🙌 YOU ARE TRULY MISSED ❤️ 🙌 🙏 ♥️

There's a lot going on in this album that is underlined for instance in his top selling hit what's going on he says only love can conquer hate and also what stands out in this album is the song flying high in the friendly sky without ever leaving the ground about drugs and drug use damn the verse how the dealer make slaves out of men I could go on and on Marvin Gaye told Smokey Robinson at Smoky sent there and Marvin was writing this album on that God was doing the writing and he was just the messenger 🥲

Avril 2023 🇨🇵 Eh Marvin Brother !!! Repose toi en paix Là haut 🌠

☝️ *promosm*

"Inbreathiate" is not a malapropism because it isn't a word, as Blanc points out. A malapropism is mistakenly using a real word in the wrong place. Inbreatheate is a nonce word, and cannot be a malapropism.

Pq?😪

Former parli debater here from the peak of popularity on your chart. This is a potentially great discussion, but Matt, my dude, you have to stop interrupting some really great discussion with the constant low-effort jokes, man.

❤

“Every thang is every thang” was the phrase back then. 😊

What is going on?🤴🙏✌️

I LOVE THIS SONG!!!♥️

Não me canso de ouvir essa linda música 😄😋