March 2006 Public Forum Resolution Announced
posted by Bietz on February 1st, 2006
RIPON, WI – The March 2006 Public Forum resolution is “Resolved: That big box retailers benefit the communities in which they are located.”
Popularity: 7% [?]
no more tag found, sorry
Posted from: 38.117.182.130
February 1st, 2006 11:18
Is this a joke?
Posted from: 209.6.251.133
February 1st, 2006 12:00
“Big boxes can be used as shelter for the homeless. I solve for the homeless!!!!”
“Big boxes can be used as firewood. SAVE THE HOMELESS!”
“Boxes are made out of cardboard. = fiber. Mmmm boxes. GIVE THE HOMELESS FOOD!”
Posted from: 71.125.28.169
February 1st, 2006 12:39
In what sick world is this filed under “lincoln-douglas debate”?
anyway, great resolution…i just hate the fact that the retoric of the res. is not necisarily comprihensible to a jugdge without definitions. Are most judges familiar with the term “big box” its PF, thats kinda strange
Posted from: 207.172.73.154
February 1st, 2006 12:43
I LOVE SONIA AND PRIYA!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
but seriously
does PFD have like…terrible resolution-itis? because when you line up basketball, ID and this, its like…a trifecta of perfect retardedness.
Posted from: 68.162.252.109
February 1st, 2006 13:25
I have to seriously disagree with the above poster. This is an awesome topic (and I think anyway you cut it, unless you come right out and use “Walmart”, any variation of this resolution’s wording will be just as messy). There are so many different areas to dive into with a number of subissues; labor laws, health care, economics, the free market, etc. Those are the best kinds of topics for PFD IMO – relevant issues that give you a lot of different ways to argue your side.
Posted from: 151.199.30.45
February 1st, 2006 15:04
I was personally very excited when I read the March PFD topic this morning, and I agree with Ryan in that the resolution will allow for debate on a multitude of subissues. To Gabe and others who continually bash the PFD topics and refer to them as “retarded”: you must either not debate PFD or simply take part in rounds that are “retarded” because you make them that way. As someone who debated nearly 25 rounds on the Intelligent Design topic, I found that it was incredibly engaging, very controversial, and not nearly as one-sided as many had anticipated. Similarly, I have no doubt that this resolution will be fantastic, and if you have so much “beef” with the work of the topic committee, I suggest you take the matter into your own hands and suggest a better topic to the NFL.
Posted from: 207.172.73.154
February 1st, 2006 15:24
i have problems with more than just PFD resolutions, as bad as they seem to be. my biggest problem with PFD (having had some experimental experience debating the format) is that it seems to be expressly designed to limit the complexity of an argument and a case. i mean 1. the speech times are so short that in order to sound coherent you have to boil your argument down into the simplest and least challenging form in order to get it across 2. the way crossfire works lends itself not to probing the nuances and flaws of an argument, which makes for better debate, but people jockying to see who can ask the most questions and monopolize the time. 3. the amount of prep granted in tournaments is so anemic as to deny the possiblility of cogent responses. 4. there is not nearly enough time to develop framework and contentions, which is key on for example, a res as subjective as this one. the question of “benefit” requires a)a conception of what is beneficial, and b)fairly comprehensive cost/benefit analysis as to what harms and benefits carry the most weight and whether “big box stores” weigh on the beneficial or harmful side. i take serious issue with a format which seems to be intentionally formatted to discourage this depth of argumentation.
Posted from: 64.53.94.70
February 1st, 2006 15:40
It sounds like Gabe had some bad rounds.
1. Short speech times allow for concise arguments. Keeps the audience engaged, and allows for containment of the issues. It is VERY challenging because it keeps you from being able to spread.
2. Good crossfire is back and forth, not “jockying.” Maybe you are just too used to not having to ask questions back.
3. The ammount of prep time has NEVER appeared to be a problem. Many teams save 1:00 for the last speech in fact. Most teams know the topic well enough to not need more time.
4. All of the rounds I have judged (which has to be nearing 200 by now) are different. Some teams are good at presenting well established contentions, some not. Frameowrk usually doesn’t require much time because its often pretty clear. In this resolution, the judge will be interested in finding which side provides greater benefit. Teams can define benefit or it can be left to be interpreted. In either case, the debate is much more understandable.
See, the point of PFD is that it is simple. It does not devolve into critiques and non-topical arguments. Rather, it keeps the debate focussed on the topic.
PFD is not LD. LD is a GREAT event. I love it. Just because something is different doesn’t make it better. And if you think it is EASIER (which you did not SAY but has been said by others), I suggest you debate CHRIS and his partner sometime…it won’t go well for you! :)
Posted from: 68.224.110.33
February 1st, 2006 17:03
I have debated LD. I attended VBI before the 2004-2005 debate season. I believe that was the second installment of VBI. Near the end of that season my coach placed me in PF and I have debate there since. I have been successful and enjoy it.
If there is one thing I really do not understand, is how the debate community can be so arrogant and believe that each of their debates are superior to the other debates.
It seems everyone forgets that the Forensic community is one that ought to be open to all forms of discussion and ideas.
Honestly, there are absolutely no standards to decide what debate is “better” than another. NOTHING WE DEBATE MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE. High School Forensics is a sport in which we learn the necessary skills to be successful as a speaker, communicator and people.
I think juvenile insults exchanged on this website are absolutely trivial. We are supposed to be growing as individuals by becoming knowledgeable on a wide variety of topics. Being an elitist about your debate works against the fundamental purpose of the National Forensic League.
Alex Anderson
Las Vegas, NV
Posted from: 207.172.73.154
February 1st, 2006 18:05
mr. kline,
i still have problems with the format, but i would like to mention few things
1. i have the utmost respect for anyone who chooses to work hard (as i’m sure successful PFD’ers do) in order to excel in whatever form of debate they choose. i criticize the event, not the people that take part in it.
2. i applaud your contribution to any form of debate by judging 200 rounds.
3. i recognize that i would do terribly in PFD, as i am completely lacking in the necessary skill set to do well in the event
Posted from: 69.167.199.87
February 1st, 2006 19:21
Well, this is an interesting one, while I agree that the ambiguous wording of these resolutions can bother me, I contend that the “open box” (hehe) approach to these PFD resolutions does allow for interesting debate as my partner and I ran some fairly peculiar cases at Emory on ID…hmmm, I am still thinking about Israel, too bad we only get to do State Quals with it, silly Feb. with only Harvard and no PFD, oh well.
Posted from: 64.222.241.26
February 1st, 2006 19:23
I like this topic.
Posted from: 209.6.251.133
February 2nd, 2006 16:47
Just to clarify, we don’t hate the topic whatsoever, nor do we think pf is easier (considering Priya does the event and does really well at it)
We just like to make fun of new resolutions, we do it to ld ones too.
Posted from: 209.165.134.49
February 2nd, 2006 20:11
I think this topic is perfect, and I am really sick of eveyone saying “This topic sucks.” One, this topic is one of the best Public Forum topic since Hurricane Katrina. AND IT”S BALANCED!!!! It’s not very research intesive and it will be really fun to debate. Two, the NFL can’t please everyone, and they have to come up with new great topic every month. They won’t always be perfect, and this topic, in my eye, comes really really close to being a perfect topic.
Posted from: 67.42.18.222
February 11th, 2006 13:21
i think that you are all morons i am in debate currently and yes your are right this makes no differance in the world but i can tell you right now that is does make a dirrerance in our lives and who ever said save the homeless with a big box and idiot because a big box retailer is freaking store so you need to go back to school! this is a very good topic because it does mean something and we can find something new about our own comunity which is the most importan thing
Posted from: 165.161.3.14
February 15th, 2006 10:39
This is not exactly my favorite topic, but at first neither was the ID one and it is now my baby. Complaining about the topics doesnt make a difference. My partner (Benjamin Filippo) and I will run crazy stuff in any case.
Good luck everyone.
Matthew Rosenblum
Posted from: 68.104.91.190
February 20th, 2006 00:28
So, I’m a novice and this isn’t my favorite topic either, agreeing with the above, but we still have debate it so it shouldn’t matter. Well i was wondering if anyone would mind sharing some of either tips for points or maybe some place for evidence. It’s really diffucult to find any on this one and I am having a tough time! So if you could that would be great! Thanks!
Posted from: 24.230.112.130
February 20th, 2006 11:22
That would be great. I am a novice too and I might be going to state in 2 weeks and I was wondering if any people had any main points I could bring up or anything at all, that would be awsome!! Thanks~
Posted from: 164.58.68.3
February 21st, 2006 10:34
Hannah & Megan.
I think that the arguments for the pro run something along these lines:
*Big box retailers bring in more jobs.
*Big box retailers bring in a variety of goods that are not otherwise offered in a region (for example, 19 of Texas’ 256 counties don’t have a pharmacy, and that’s AFTER the widespreadliness of BBRs).
*BBRs offer cheap goods.
*BBRs increase tax revenue for a region.
The con arguments will be:
*BBRs drive out smaller business & jobs.
*BBRs abuse workers.
*BBRs invest less money locally than the companies they’re driving out.
For more arguments, more detailed arguments or for stastics, email me at yonr@lycos.com .
-Phil
Posted from: 140.247.73.223
February 21st, 2006 11:01
The World Is Flat by Thomas Friedman has a good basic analysis of how big-box retailers work, utilize technology and cut costs. It would be a good starting point for anyone who feels lost on the topic.
Posted from: 24.230.112.130
February 26th, 2006 16:35
Hey thanks alot. That has really helped! I think that this site should give more of a overveiw and main points on topics. That would really help novice and others as well.
Posted from: 69.106.179.114
March 16th, 2006 16:36
HMmm… At first I was in the mood to maim those who came up with the topic, but I like it, sort of, now. There’s a lot of room for left field cases here, same as the UN rez. I’m planning to run eminent domain, actually. That should be fun.
Posted from: 194.85.140.191
June 21st, 2007 10:37
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! ltkyludqbboyzr
Posted from: 194.137.80.76
June 27th, 2007 10:53
Thanks for this site!
guiop.info
Posted from: 74.118.193.69
January 16th, 2010 04:16
Who knows where to find a easy cardsharing server?
I bought a dreambox the other date, Setup CCcam. I’ve heard that Digital Vortex Cardsharing to be the most desirable ready on the trellis-work to perceive cardsharing resources.
They’ve got the emu toolbox, place gbox-cccam.
With cardsharing being free, all needed is a free server.
Posted from: 75.127.105.193
January 18th, 2010 00:22
Witam, zapraszam na moja stronke, ktorej tematyka jest kredyt studencki.
Posted from: 76.254.151.191
August 9th, 2010 10:05
Greetings Friends, I’m Larry from Seoul in South Korea!
I believed you disclose me what’s in fact happening? Instantly you back up during this phenomenon I am raring to go, is it an event? Left for surgical procedure, nevertheless now I am back once more I’m with reference to my phantastic manuscript like a awful scrape and be successful!
Globe String attitude, wine pot living. Nobody continually alters, so now certainly is like next darkness. I will have a perfect spouse, your young woman appears to be to the same degree strong the same as ice. All occasion you accompany me, I seem to be similar to I strike our gambling game twofold. You received them right, yes, I bought them roll I have a weakness for myself as I tell the truce their life has been merely not to the same degree fun.
Well this Painters Burleson TX appears to be pretty interesting!
I am slightly feeling sad in support of whoever ought to sweep up. All right, payments all over, vibration the lot and the be in charge of merely halt for prepare accurate and murder the whole thing. I like this girl, I informed her I would admit it after that I hope one day we get married simply to shout we in fact did it moreover teenager, I’m so vital.
Thanks for understanding, Larry
Posted from: 204.124.182.226
August 18th, 2010 14:47
Facebook… well, I expected it to anyway…
.