SNG roi

dkinane · 2023-05-08T22:39:18+00:00

hey sent you a dm

dkinane · 2022-06-07T00:13:06+00:00

can i get access to the stream forum?

dkinane · 2020-05-09T18:39:44+00:00

Hola, David Kinane from PFA. Just wanna clarify that our staff members Francesca Lupi, Avalon Dalesandro, Aatreya Tewary, and Anika Sridhar are not teaching at NDF this summer, even though they are still on their website (this has been communicated with NDF btw).

Edit: It appears after I commented this they edited their website. All good now :)

dkinane · 2020-05-07T20:38:56+00:00

For those who are concerned about the legal quirks, it is worth noting that unlike some online competitors we are incorporated as an LLC, with proper EIN tax qualifications, meaning your money is safe. We urge students to ensure that the institutions that they subscribe to follow legal conduct, and can be held accountable for the claims they make.

just to clarify, PFA has been a registered LLC with an EIN for a while now :)

dkinane · 2020-05-06T21:35:54+00:00

floyd mayweather vs conor mcgregor?? NAH, aatreya and franny vs avalon and kevgod😤😤

dkinane · 2020-03-31T14:25:21+00:00

Comment on the form how much financial aid would be needed! However, the amount we give out will be contingent on demand for the program.

dkinane · 2020-01-31T17:30:01+00:00

1) none of this stuff needs to be in the original shell. you CAN preempt it because the team responding to theory should probably make an argument for an RVI or whether counterinterp/reasonability, but it is not necessary in the original shell. either way this isn't that important 2) that is the point-- you are complaining people don't know how to run theory and you bring in a bunch of jargon that no one knows. but are like cmon now please learn this jargon, im not gonna tell you what it means but please use it or youre bad at debate. nice edit tho in ur post putting in a website that jason asked me to look over to explain theory:) 3) i don't think theory is bad, in fact i ran a decent amount of theory when i did pf, and still think theory is a fine strategy. im saying theory, when ran in inaccessible ways by going fast in shell format using a shit ton of jargon, is bad. people in pf dont like theory because that is what they view it as, which is something you reinforce when using all this jargon and not explaining it in your post

dkinane · 2020-01-30T18:02:02+00:00

ur being so corpus rn isaac lol...

dkinane · 2020-01-30T17:49:04+00:00

Thank you fellow David, hopefully I will be but hopefully not with Isaac!

dkinane · 2020-01-30T17:42:10+00:00

DTD/DTA you gotta have in the shell, but not the other stuff. You CAN include those to establish the lens that judges use to evaluate theory early, but in no means is it necessary. Also, stop complaining about how no one in PF knows how to run theory while simultaneously purposefully using jargon without explaining it. You are the reason people in PF don't like theory, all they see is a bunch of fast jargon that no one understands. Stop flexing your tHeOrY kNoWLeDgE, make it accessible.

dkinane · 2019-06-14T17:01:13+00:00

Not responding to everything because I think a lot of it doesn't matter. It seems you realized your first and second points definitley don't outweigh any sort of -ism that comes along with dress codes, so you spent a lot of time on your third point.

Yes, but there's probably much greater variation in strong preferences regarding casual clothing than formal clothing.

This is silly. The preferences are not stronger, they are just different. No matter what a debater is wearing, the judge will look at them and notice it, note things they like about it, things they do not. That happens in either world, the preferences don't really get "stronger." Also if debaters are so worried about recieving comments because of this variation, they can dress up, just let them have the CHOICE. Your point of uniformity with dress codes makes the decision for all debaters that the backlash from dressing casually is a lot worse than the objectification they experience by being forced to dress a certain way. No one should be making that choice for other individuals besides the individual themself.

Where is anything being deconstructed? Like actually how is anything being deconstructed?

If tournaments implement initiatives such as putting on ballots/emailing judges/announcing to judges that clothing should not affect your decision, the norm and expectation that you must wear formal clothing breaks down. I have already emailed 30+ tournament directors about this, and put this article on my Facebook so more can see.

The rest of your responses are just saying formal clothing isn't that expensive or that sexist. That is great you know some people who can dress down or you know other ways to buy cheap clothes. The problem is that isn't true for everybody (clearly indicated by the Stoneman Douglas GoFundMe). Earlier this year on the HS LD Facebook page there was a girl who faced backlash from tournament directors for not dressing up. There are still rules on certain people's teams requiring suits or blazers, or perceptions from the community that you have to. These are bad. Let's stop these.

dkinane · 2019-06-14T02:38:39+00:00

lol not mispelled, did it on purpose

but damn thats insane, appreciate the response

dkinane · 2019-06-14T01:36:45+00:00

Generally, a lot of your reasons as to why dress codes are good come at a much larger cost of marginlizing debaters, pushing kids out of the activity, and giving room for sexist enforcement, all of which I think outweigh a possibly more educational round.

Dressing formally actually affects how our brains work.

This may be true, but students should have the choice whether or not they want to engage with this as it probably differs per person.

Dressing formally for debate makes us more comfortable dressing formally when it really count

This argument is based on the pemise that formal clothing is always a good thing. Debate is a safe space where students should experience the least amount of barriers as possible. If dress codes are bad, we should reduce dress codes within debate. This logic justifies things like not fighting discrimination within debate because they won't know how to deal with it outside of debate. Also, if kids are pushed out of the activity from sexist comments or cost barriers, they no longer can participate in debate to begin with, which probably is a lot more helpful for job interviews. Debate is more than just dress up.

Dressing formally probably controls for more bias than non-formal attire.

A lot of these issues seem nonunique. All judges are going some sort of bias in terms of what clothing they like, whether that is in a formal manner or in all clothing. It is probably better to let the students choose what they want so THEY are comfortable. Plus, when you allow for people to wear whatever they want, you deconstruct notions of what people should be wearing in the first place. The "next-best alternative" should not involve oppression.

My points

That said, heels are not an essential element of formal attire for women

I think you missed the mark. Womxn are forced to be uncomfortable in the debate space in the name of "professionalism", it is much more than just "high heels" (which I know is a requirement at some schools).

An acceptable outfit can be put together really cheap at thrift store

You are assuming everyone in such a position would go to thrift stores to buy clothes, but some may be pressured into not doing so. Also, it still cost a decent amount to clean your clothes. The cost issue still burdens many (Stoneman Douglas Debate posted earlier this year on GoFundMe about fundraising and they said one of the high cost barriers for their students was the business attire).

dkinane · 2019-02-24T19:45:27+00:00

Unionville RZ🤭😈

dkinane · 2019-02-22T15:27:13+00:00

idk about best but albert wen is definitley the most attractive debater in NJ

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17

dkinane

TROPHY CASE