Friday, August 27, 2010

Disclosure Q&A

On 9/7 we hope to resume recording, and our first show will be about disclosure. (I know. You're shocked—shocked!—to hear it.) If you have any questions for us, post them here as comments. We are hoping CP will be on the show, and that, soon after, we'll have AT, so if you have questions for them, post them as well.


  1. My first priority question: I would like to hear from Bietz or AT on the following:

    what is your positive vision for the future of LD that includes disclosure? in the ideal world where implementation is not an issue, how is this version of LD substantively better than the status quo version (details please) and what sort of basis for future improvement beyond disclosure does disclosure give us? if we accept disclosure as a (at the minimum) national community convention, how does that interact with LD at large in the future (nationals? state championships? local debate?) and what would be the proverbial next step in continuing to improve debate?

    my second priority question (if i only get one, please answer the one above and not this one):

    what do you perceive as the major (or minor) flaws in disclosure implementation/intent, and what would you expect to sacrifice in a world where disclosure is implemented properly?

  2. My first question is for Bietz and AT because as far as I know, they have the only programs that run disclosure theory.

    Since your debaters began running disclosure theory, have you actually seen more people/ people losing to the position disclosing? If the answer is no, do you believe that there are any other benefits to disclosure theory that are not gained from discussing disclosure on public forums?

    My second question has more to do with disclosure itself.

    What level of disclosure is 'appropriate'? Right now, it seems like the norm is that people disclose a tag, a full cite, and the first and last three words of the card. If the goal of disclosure is to just familiarize everyone with positions that are being run, I would agree that this is sufficient, perhaps even more than enough, since all a debater would need to see would be a general description of the arguments. If the goal is to check evidence ethics, I think we would have to go a step further than the norm. Given that teams from large programs or private schools have more access to resources than small teams from public schools, it would seem to be appropriate to at least include the full text of the cards quoted.

    Sorry if these topics have already been discussed. I haven't been following the disclosure debate too closely. If these things are mentioned somewhere else could someone point me in the direction of a link where I could find the discussion?