Debate Coaches Online

First things first. O’C has now spent more time watching Star Trek than Leo Tolstoy spent writing War and Peace. I wonder if there’s a surprise ending, and if there is, if he’s surprised every time he sees it. I know for a fact that every time he sees The Empire Strikes Back the first thing he does is call up everybody he knows and says, Guess what, Darth Vader is Luke’s father. For that matter, he also thinks that Darth Vader is Norman Bates’s mother in Psycho, and that Kaiser Soze is really Captain Kirk but a lot younger. There’s an Oliver Sacks book in this somewhere…

Meanwhile, back at the “let’s throw all the coaches into the pit and see which ones emerge” discussion, our story so far took up where Bietz left off in his old Rostrum article, bemoaning our lack of conversation when, first, there is so much to converse about and, second, it is, theoretically, so easy to do so. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I live surrounded by blogs and social networks and a general sense that, for example, Bietz, who lives a few thousand miles away from me, is a friend I can talk to at a moment’s notice, publicly, about issues that concern us both. My ultimate suggestion was that we should publish something akin to an ad hoc magazine, moderated, easily available and concentrating on our big issues.

Let’s look at the comments that arose along the way.

Rob: “More importantly however, I really don't know if there would be much buy-in. This format isn't all that different from what already exists in Rostrum and other publications, except the volume would presumably be greater and more easily aggregated. Assuming one were able to harness the energies necessary to produce quality content on a consistent basis (and that's a big if), wouldn't it be better spent working through existing channels rather than attempting to build up the necessary critical mass to make this endeavor worthwhile? The infrastructure is in place, there's no need to reinvent the wheel. To the extent we're willing to invest more energy into communication, it seems most fruitful to increase the content of existing mediums.”

I think that CP has addressed the lack of interest from the existing group that should do this (NFL) and the difficulty in competing groups attempting it. I am, as true members of the VCA know, rather ambivalent about NFL, but my bottom line is that I believe that they ought to be considered the voice of our activity. The problem is, de facto, they aren’t. This would be the perfect opportunity for them to step up to the plate and, for example, make Rostrum an online publication that would do this job, but that is highly unlikely. It would be nice if they did, but I won’t be holding my breath.

I do disagree with Rob about the existence of content. I think there’s plenty of things out there, and new ones all the time (e.g., the PF paradigm, which at the moment does not seem to exist). Every problem solved is a step toward new problems that need solving, at least from a dialectic perspective. If we do run out of content, then we’ll be done.

PJ Wexler, the major domo of the old ld-l, offers the following: “Getting a critical mass, and keeping it is the crucial issue. In the LD-L Days of Yore, there were certainly Days of Quality and Days of Yuck. Which is why, even though I am still paying $5 a month to keep it going (more from inertia than anything else ) we want to strike the proper balance. So your dividing up the posts to 1)keep the size managable and 2) give people a reason to check in) is proper.

“Having a central location, priceless.”

I was, like most other folks at the time, a dedicated follower of ld-l (if for no other reason than to keep up when Jules and the Mite published new Nostrum episodes). And true, sometimes the conversation degenerated, but as often as not interesting and important issues were being discussed. The problem was that most of the discussion was done by the young and the restless. For whatever reason—technophobia, teenophobia, noiseophobia—most coaches steered clear of it, not only as contributors but as auditors. The only thing worse than foolish youth is foolish old age, if you ask me. Anyhow, at the time a listserver was state of the art, and it bypassed all the problems like different platform and the like. But that was then, and as I say, there was little coachean buy-in. Limiting discussion to coaches, or at least separating coach and student discussion (I want to hear student opinions), is probably a necessity.

Rob later adds: “Also, one thing that has clearly created a sense of community in a certain sub-community of blogs I visit (related to mass-transit, urban design, and biking issues in my particular metropolis) is the frequency with which everyone links to each other. The dialogue you had a few weeks ago over computers in extemp was a great example. Doing so really helps at getting a multitude of voices, and increases awareness of all the blogs out there. This would require no central planning, quotas, or real any type of mandate at all. All you need to do is adopt a norm among existing authors.”

He’s absolutely right here, but the problem may lie in the fact that, realistically, there aren’t that many coaches out there blogging, and certainly few are blogging as regularly as I am, or at such length. A network, connected by the various tools du jour would do the job, but my guess is that most coaches don’t use the tools du jour, and/or won’t use them. A social network of coaches communicating with whatever would be great, however. Maybe that is the way to go, but the same problem arises that CP talks about. No matter what we do, we need someone in the middle to put it together.

At the moment, I would put this back on the shoulders of those with organizations already in place. Maybe I’m wrong about NFL, but absent them, I’d go with NDCA, which brings us back to MB. But the key is, we need the catalyst, the person to make it happen, the person to find and connect people, to focus discussions, to keep us honest.

Any volunteers?