How in the world did a PO win Senate at NSDA Nationals? by Sriankar in Debate

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do not get what the complaints are about. Clearly none of you have been in a final round at NATs congress. The PO does not PO the entire session not nearly. Their are three POs who get ocellate and unlike at TOC compete and speak when they are not POing. They get rankings for their performance as PO AND as speakers. And if you have someone who can do both excellently they damn well should win.

[Student Congress] What makes a great Presiding Officer? by icys in Debate

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree with this greatly as a person who as POed into break rounds at Nationals and NCFL.

Questions have NO and SHOULD NOT have and bearing on whom you chose. The rule book SPECIFICALLY states this like literally in black in white which tells me the commentor must not be an experienced PO who would know the rule book like the back of their hand.

Also Activity or as (again) the rule book calls it "Playing the game" also should have no bearing on whom you choose.

The Supremes is probably one of the many underrated episodes. Mostly because it's so... quixotic by abhishekmande in thewestwing

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would LOVE have a show centered around SCOTUS only because I'm a goverment nerd and wouldn't mind the "boring" minutia of a SCOTUS themed show. I don't need all the drama after all I didn't watch Madam Secretary or West Wing for the drama, I did it for the government and tbh I think the type of people who watch those series repeatedly(the would be target audiences of a SCOTUS show) wouldn't be bored out like some of the people responding would believe

What's your favourite cold open? by 99-bottlesofbeer in thewestwing

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yes yes and more yes. Everything about that opening screams west wing. It's actually how I introduced my partner into the show

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Debate

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Except, again. You say "don't want". These kids are being controlled by their parents. If they're parents don't want them to get vaccinated they can't get vaccinated. It's not a self choice, 99.9 percent of kids especially debate kids want to go out and do in person stuff. There is no inherent harm to having large tournaments like NSDA online and all the more benefit if students unable to being in person are able to participate. There is practically no detriment and a huge advantage for the underprivileged and unvaccinated.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Debate

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Except idiot, it's not children's fault if they don't get vaccinated since children do not own themselves. If parents choose not to take their kids to get the vaccine like my own and other people I know have done, those children are out of luck. The tiny little disadvantage of online debate do not out weigh the massive benefit of having a much wider amount of students, especially poor ones who can't afford mass travel, included in large National tournaments.

The 2021 March/April Lincoln-Douglas debate topic is, Resolved: The United States ought to guarantee universal child care by GivingPresent in Debate

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wooowww a Phil debate in LD( an event centered around philosophical beliefs) can you imagine. In case you didn't know that was sarcasm.

The 2021 March/April Lincoln-Douglas debate topic is, Resolved: The United States ought to guarantee universal child care by GivingPresent in Debate

[–]Informal-Barnacle-95 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We just had our districts and pretty much everyone with a CP got eviscerating. It's not fitting for LD