[Ndca-l] Results of the Ethics Statement voting

Michael Antonucci antonucci23
Thu Nov 5 18:31:52 EST 2009


1. Why establish any threshold at all?  What's the benefit of a quorum?

I just think the NDCA pretty clearly functions according to an 80/20
formula. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle>

Many members sign up, enjoy the benefits, support the existence of the NDCA,
but are genuinely neutral on the mechanics of its operation.  I feel the
same way about my county water commissioner - I am glad that there is a
county water commission (um, if there is in DC), I'm sure it does many nice
things, but I'm simply not going to consider its mechanics or anything about
it at all unless there are alligators in the sewers.

I would be discomfited, however, to discover that the County Water
Commission walked off the job or abandoned some rockin' septic initiative
because they were waiting for my input.  The NDCA membership is not
analogous to a lawmaking body, because time/attention constraints prohibit
active participation from most members.  Direct democracy is nice - direct
democracy with a quorum is structurally dysfunctional.

2. Going forward (if there is a forward), I can't emphasize strongly enough
that this document is supposed to be a "consensus of ethics" document, not
an attempt to "fiat everything that everyone wants debate to be."

Scott's commentary on the
3NR<http://www.the3nr.com/2009/11/04/ndca-ethics-statement/>illustrates
exactly how this debate may go off the rails - any attempt to
move forward will be met with claims that it doesn't "go far enough" because
it doesn't do X, Y, or Z.  I don't know how pre-round prep became an ethical
issue, but I guess it did.

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Tara Tate <ttate at glenbrook.k12.il.us> wrote:

> Only working on informal data about how much of the membership typically
> votes (Board elections, topic ballots, etc), one suggestion I had was either
> a 25% or 33% membership quorum has to vote in order for the vote to
> count/pass.  Of those voting, 60% or more have to vote yes.
>
> Again, just throwing out some numbers to get the conversation going.
>
> TT
>
> Best,
> Tara L. Tate
> Director of Debate, Glenbrook South (IL)
> Executive Board Member, National Debate Coaches Association
> Co-director, The 2009 Glenbrooks
> 4000 West Lake Avenue
> Glenview, IL 60026
> (847) 486-4746
>
-- 
Michael Antonucci
Debate Coach
Georgetown University
Mobile: 617-838-3345
Office: 202-687-4079
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.debatecoaches.org/pipermail/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org/attachments/20091105/e1223bd2/attachment-0004.htm>



More information about the Ndca-l mailing list