<div class="gmail_quote"><div><blockquote style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">One quick clarification. The section of the bylaws where this clause is
contained only applies to the State tournaments that are run by the
GFCA. While it is reasonable to expect that most tournaments will model
the GFCA state policies, tournament directors will still have the
ability to set different expectations.<br></blockquote><div><br>Thanks — this is excellent. In Wisconsin, the WDCA's bylaws applied to all tournaments **sanctioned** by the WDCA — tournaments that deviated from the organization's bylaws were technically "unsanctioned" events, something that school administrations—if made aware of—would obviously find objectionable. Unsanctioned tournaments also did not count toward qualification for the state tournament. The Georgia model — GFCA bylaws apply to GFCA tournaments only — is definitely superior. <br>
</div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">I agree with Jenny, but have one question: What if a coach works on a file during the 1ac and posts it to the teams' server. Is it ok to use it?<br>
</blockquote><div><br>I think the "spirit of the law" should be that once the (1)AC (or whatever the first speech is called in Public Forum) begins, the students competing in a particular contest round should receive no assistance from anyone but their partners. Original research is consistent with this norm but assistance from coaches or teammates (including new files/updates) is not.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="h5">
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</a><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</a>] On Behalf Of Jenny Heidt<br>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 10:56 AM<br>
To: Berthiaume, Maggie; Jeffrey Miller; <a href="mailto:thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [GFCA] The By-Laws<br>
<br>
I agree with both of Maggie's suggestions but also think that students<br>
should be allowed to research in debates. 2 important examples re: why<br>
this should be the case:<br>
<br>
1) A few years ago where there was some very surprising aff T<br>
evidence--a search during the debate revealed that it was fabricated.<br>
<br>
2) A politics DA was read that had passed. The aff found one card<br>
saying "it passed." The judge did not know either way so that was<br>
critical and prevented what would have been a fairly dumb debate from<br>
occurring.<br>
<br>
If a position is so bad that it can be beaten with a card or two found<br>
during prep time, why not?<br>
<br>
Also, we have our files on email and a server. If someone forgot to<br>
download something, why couldn't they access it?<br>
<br>
So, I think that the rule should exclude electronic communication<br>
between anyone besides the partner but not otherwise limit internet<br>
access.<br>
<br>
Jenny<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
thegfca mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org" target="_blank">http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
thegfca mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org" target="_blank">http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>