Comments on: Parli Equalization Proposal

By: Artem

Artem — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 02:01:10 +0000

I may be wrong, but I think that parli and PF run simultaneously at states. Since PF has also been increased to 48, it seems reasonable to guess that doubling in PF and extemp wouldn’t be allowed either.

By: Benjamin Morris

Benjamin Morris — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 01:19:00 +0000

I wonder if this will cause a shift from Parliamentary to Public Forum for the Extemporaneously-inclined.

By: Artem

Artem — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 00:49:19 +0000

There was a post on FOL, according to which the increase in the parli field at CHSSA will prevent extempers from double-entering in parli. http://www.forensicsonline.net/forum/showthread.php/8680-CHSSA-forbidding-Parli-Extemp-double-entry-next-year

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 13 May 2010 06:00:29 +0000

Chin more elitism…huh.
Quantity does outweigh “quality”(however you measure that) in a democracy.
Last time I check the “top” echelon of society doesn’t control government, the majority does. Whats the majority? Oh yeh, more quantity.
And in the grand scheme of things, values between debates truly only matter, marginally. So differences in quality, if any (which I don’t think there are) can’t objectively be measured. But student participation can. More people do the “easier” event and deserve to be recognized. CHSSA advocated the tyranny of the majority by the minority. I consider that unfair.

By: Spartacus

Spartacus — Wed, 12 May 2010 21:33:56 +0000

Also, Chin. Read the information compiled on the top of the website please. THe numbers appear to have been crunched, but could use verification. if you are up to it, do so. you might reveal a massive parli conspiracy, bu t i doubt it.

By: Spartacus

Spartacus — Wed, 12 May 2010 19:05:54 +0000

Interesting point regarding fairness (we have tons of parli debaters, we need more spots) compared to education (parli is the WORST event, all events are better)

Benjamin. In both threads, you have refuted about 10% of the post. Do you agree with everything else which as said?

Also, LOL at 7 in octos.

bad number n00b.

Out of 68 total teams qualled to the TOC, 25 came from the Golden State.

Big schools were lynbrook, harker, mira loma, i forget the others. ohyeah st francis, other schools sent 1-2 teams.

Benjamin, while all CA debaters lost, 2 were aff (harder to win). But that is not important. Let’s look at the sedings for the teams. Harker JJ was the top see, harker had 2 also. st francis was 4th seed. They killed in prelims, but had one unlucky round in octos.

Also, why is a parliamentary debater (you guys don’t even have bids do you?) bashing debaters at the toc. you guys dont even have a toc to go to.

By: Benjamin Morris

Benjamin Morris — Wed, 12 May 2010 04:38:29 +0000

There were three CA Public Forum octofinalists at TOC, all of which dropped there.

By: CrimsonChin

CrimsonChin — Wed, 12 May 2010 04:25:37 +0000

Unfortunate. At least LD/Policy are unchanged.

i think pufo should definitely have 64, parli im like meh. i guess. maybe 33 is fine with me, 48 is well you should be pretty ecstatic.

I suppose that parliamentary interest/participation has definitely increased over the past 3 years. It makes sense. 32 seems impossibly tough, some of the better teams can get squeezed out =P.

Is it really true that parliamentary is the most popular? this site vs other sites is the smallest. at tournaments, there are more entries for ld. (JOT)

While fairness is important, shouldn’t the lessened educational value of the event compared to others be taken into consideration?

Colleges rank debate events accordingly during applications. shouldn’t we do so as well? quantity NEVER is greater than quality. the quality of debaters in other events is far superior to that of parli. that is also a fact. other debaters work much harder, smarter, and longer, getting much more out of the activity.

harker has what, 10 amazing teams in pufo? lynbrook is pretty boss too, many schools are. CA’s pufo is intense. we had 7 octofinalists from CA in the TOC (correct me if im wrong)

LD and POlicy, CA is amazing as well.

does anyone really do parli out of california? has this thing been contained???

by popularity ,you guys only mean CA right?

By: Coach St. Amant

Coach St. Amant — Tue, 11 May 2010 16:31:12 +0000

1) My understanding is that the entry allocations for CX & LD remain unchanged at 64 each. The new Parli/PuFo slots are net additions to the competition.

2) League allocations for the state tournament are not decided until the Fall CHSSA meeting, but I am not aware of any bonus mechanism for the new 48-team fields. Perhaps when ‘full equalization’ occurs, bonuses will be included. For now, it sounds like 4 extra parli/pufo entries for each of the 4 CHSSA Areas. Best guess is you should take the number of parli/pufo slots you had in your league last year & expect it to increase by 50% next year.

Your league president or the delegate who represented your league at last weekend’s CHSSA meeting may have more details/insight.

By: Artem

Artem — Tue, 11 May 2010 02:01:26 +0000

The parli community owes Mr. St. Amant and Mr. Ballingall a huge thank you.

Also, will there be bonus slots for leagues that performed well at previous state tourneys?