Lee McKinnis (57)
Kristina Marynczak (37)
Killian Noonan (36)
Melissa Castillo (32)
NikoVelazquez (27)
Shannon Ratzel (23)
Michelle Reyes (22)
Kyle Barczak (21)
Maura Bilek (21)
Susan Bayaa (21)
For this week’s journal entry I will report on the “conclusion”. With the conclusion I recognized the book’s title. And the grainy image. It is nothing but repeated drawings of grains of white rice. I also enjoyed the response re. the “but you did not draw it over and over. He did”. As there is that sense of “LOLZ anyone would do that”. Good response is “well did they? Well screw them, they didn’t do it, someone else did – therefore he gets the glory and whatever”. The part of the creator basically doing this process for some sort of ‘liberation through discipline’ or something like what. Stressing yourself to the breaking point in order to the breaking point for some sort of good feeling which comes from exhausting yourself halfway to death? See the ‘surrendering yourself to the process’ statement the author did make as well which seems to explain that and point in that direction as well. Apparently the authors don’t like the idea of just wishing you could mentally flow things and write from scratch work and paper. Because it’s not stressful and eye-popping, heart-attack, brain-aneurysm creating work. Are you a bad enough dude to give yourself a stroke for your art? Also I am reminded of the ‘rice buddy’ plushie I used to have, until I lost him, since we are discussing rice and whatnot. I lost him on the train and I went to the CTA stations looking for him, asked the people at the lost and found. It was not happy or fun. Hopefully anyone who found him is taking care of him… Also see http://www.rice-buddies.com/
Eric DeVillez. “Why White Rice? Thinking Through Writing”. Epilogue/”A Conclusion”. Kendall Hunt. 2010. Print
Updates from Lee McKinnis RSS Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
Lee McKinnis
-
Lee McKinnis
For this review, I read the “Rupture” story – focusing on practical research that students do when they do personal ethnographic research, which ic contracted to ‘by the book’ learning. The “Ruptura” story is interested in the requirements as well as how things change when you are more involved in the process instead of writing things. There is a difference between research and practice, but people from both sides argue about it claiming that ‘practice’ or ‘research’/theory is better. Though someone’s experience is not the same thing as everyone’s experiences, and some theories will not translate well into practice, without tweaking. Both are useful and can complement each other. Focusing on explaining “the other” – foreign people, cultures and ideas in a better manner is also useful and a good thing. Being noted as an outsider is also importsnt to talk about to, if one notices you as a ‘carpetbagger’ or a foreigner, that is a problem. There is another problem if there is a difference in how people speak, to the point of mutual unintelligbility. Also i cannot say that it is just ‘priviledge’ – not all the students are exactly ‘priviledged’. And yes, the transitory nature of volunteering for more ‘serious’ things is scary and can be such to some… -Carrick, Himley and Jacobi. “Ruptura: Acknowledging the Lost Subjects of thr Service Learning Story. Book. Pages 298-314. Book. Accessed 4/16/2012. http://learning.writing101.net/wp-content/readings/ruptura.pdf
-
Lee McKinnis
My extended family has often received items from the Greater Chicago Food Depository. I am not sure how it is done, or what criteria is needed to go get food from a food depository. Given my family has managed to receive items from the food bank (food close to spoiling or non-preferred canned goods) I wonder what is required. I also remember my grandmother telling me of her experiences with seeing people in Cadillacs, Lexus and other luxury vehicles parking ~1 block from a food bank and then walking to the food bank as if they are poor . Likely, it is not hard to go into a food bank and get free food. Understandably so, as it is hard to exactly go and say ‘you’re not poor enough, go to hell’ and morally questionable. My family has also DONATED food to the depository before – often during the fall, so it is an interesting cycle. So I will go personally to the Greater Chicago Food Depository to see what happened.
Our team is going to focus their platform on food scarcity. To this end we have planned to go to a food pantry or food bank in order to witness the problems with food scarcity. To see how true or exaggerated they are. Some historians claim that there were hundreds of thousands of excess deaths in the ‘Great Depression’ era USA from starvation and other issues. Is there a similar situation in the US now? I doubt so. But I will see, after all thousands of people were left to starve and drown to death in New Orleans circa 2005.
We all mainly discussed and organized our decision-making at the Moraine Valley Community College Library. Discussing where to have the event, whether in the city or suburbs, how to get there, and if we can organize as a group. Due to transportation and location and education and occupation time constraints, we would have to work individually or as a group for the entire project.
After discussing things with each other, and trying to see what happened – I personally decided to go to the Greater Chicago Food Depository personally to see to the situation and to deal with those problems. Due to the differences between me and the other group members – I personally living in Chicago proper with no car and they living in suburbs with vehicles, we ended up commencing an ad-hoc splitting of tasks, but still tried to continue some sort of communication networks to keep both unequal haves of the project coherent and connected to each other. For my part, I went to the Chicago Food Depository, as written above.
After one of my classes, I went and took the bus there. The 381 PACE bus to be specific, and the 53A CTA bus. 381 goes east-west on 95th st, and I got off at Pulaski north to the 53A Pulaski bus. I noticed people who went to my former high school as they forgot to put their ids away. I arrived there, and walked around west of Pulaski until I found the building. It was surprising that the building was new, or appeared to be new. Arriving there, I went about the process of looking for the entrance. Not the loading docks. Okay, the place with the gate. I entered and then listened to the people who were organizing things – then we went to “work”. We loaded potatoes from sacks and put them in boxes, then moved the boxes, weighed them as well as collected them. It was fun accelerating boxes to a high speed and ramming them into other boxes, or slowing them down before that happens. It’s like you’re accelerating a slug or other object in a magnetic catapult to launch into space or out of a railgun into the hull of an enemy spaceship! Only without millions of volts of power. And the entire time I discussed ‘Sonic’ and ‘Starfox’ video games with someone. Well I did realize I can even discuss sonic with people, even though I am not a heavy Sonic fan. But give we basically took care of potatoes, there are other things to discuss!
Just as atoms interact with each other in different manners depending on the mass, density, temperature, ratio, pressure as well as other variables – humans will interact with each other in varying manners based off their race, age, ratio, sex or gender or other factors. There are social groups which humans create which can coalesce, form and/or dissolve against each other. Humans can form friendships or romantic love between each other, just as atoms form bonds to create molecules, and factors like energy injected to destroy the molecular bond can destroy the molecular bonds – just as factors like a (formerly?) good friend who stole your boyfriend can destroy human relationships.Apparently that is also a common trick in buying cars. People who dress shabbily and who aren’t seen driving in a ‘good’ vehicle go to a dealership to get a lower price.
-
Lee McKinnis
this is in response to “the cycle of socialization”. The paper is too focused on the context of the US, but given this is was written for those in the US, it is not surprising though. Also arguing over priviledge results in a lot of drama from some people. Also fighting against society is annoying and hard to do. As the author notes. the examples of socialization works also good, as some cases of “socialization” can be complete garbage. Institutional/cultural socialization is also useful and factual, i.e. ethnic stereotypes of people when you make friends with them. I.e. “white” or “black” jokes which comes out and some uncomfortable feelings from hearing those jokes if they’re targeted towards you. Also, there’s a lot of questionable material on the internet, especially on some forums which are basically drama-filled and full of sources which have been twisted around a lot. The internet provides a lot of good free speech but there are times where I feel that free speech is overrated. But then again I have engorged on plenty of free speech – those without it will find it a desperate need. I do like to note this part: The “we need the help of our brothers or our sisters or our agent allies to make change” – be careful with that phrasing. I remember black nationalists being wary of that thought – as shown in their writing and speeches in way 1960s CE. It seems to imply that you need the dominating group to help you, and that that need can be turned into another form of control. Some have argued for that, but I do not necessarily agree with that idea.
“Cycle of Socialization”. Bobbie Haro. Adams et al, Readings in Diversity + Social Justice. Page 15-21. http://learning.writing101.net/wp-content/readings/harro.pdf Accessed April 11, 2012 -
Lee McKinnis
1. My Draft Work has been proceeding at the same rate as it has been happening in the past. But the draft work is getting longer over time, as shown by my most recent paper on debate team experiences and my responses to the debate team/my observations of the debate team experiences and debate tournaments in general for the Chicago Leagues. I do believe my last paper which is being interviewed the day of this assessment being submitted is up to par and completed under good faith.
2. I will have to rwevise my last two papers, both to deal with any problems with length, grammar, mechanics and problems with the phrasing of the papers. I will have to replace some of my citations for the paper on terrorism as a social issue. I will have to probably trim down some (a lot!) of my historical references in my first paragraph, or provide more context as to what I am willing to live or die or kill for.
3. I have not been up to par on peer review, I have not reached the 500 word minimum editing for the papers required for the peer review. The letter response has been attempted, but it is harder to write a response to a letter which is longer than the letter unless it is something you are experienced in, skilled in or has an obsession with. In a lot of my more recent peer reviews, they were short and not so good. Actually, they were bad
4. I have not noticed the open conversation part but I have posted in the comment sections for random things which I noticed. My post count is high, but as people know from forums a high post count does not make one a “good” forum poster or productive in any manner…
5. In the recent few weeks since Spring Break, I have caught up with all my reading assignments which were required, as I have acquired my book and used it in order to finish any reading required – and that is not removed as a threat. Yes the writing, like the weekly reports are connected to my daily readings.
6. I have met with my professor when I slipped a bunch of times several times to see what the problem was with the situation and how to fix the situation so everything does not collapse. I have not had problems with writing so I have not gone to the writing center.
7. One lesson I learned was to take it easy and have some fun – the paragraph to have some fun in writing was good too. It reminded me to do other things with my writing for alternate-history and whatnot, even if I see all sorts of different writing styles on forums (i.e. pretending to write a newspaper, or letters from a hypothetical terrorist or revolutionary in this universe, etc). the second one to “kill your darlings” is harder to do, as I prefer to at least rewrite them into another place. But I do have textfiles of old things which will be reused in other cases for the aforementioned fiction writing.
8. I honestly have not seen or made any sort of updated plan that I have noticed.
9. A C, ideally.
10. Erm….no. Nothing else.Assigned reading this semester
-
Lee McKinnis
For chapter six, it is useful and good that the author did focus more on creativity, as this book does have a slant towards research and other “non-creative” writing. The difference in how peopel judge creative writing as well as non-creative writing is also useful. the problems dealing with “the rules of standard english” are one of the most annoying, given the majority uses it to cement their hegemony – but you can see nationalists and separatists promote their dialects (or call them languages, given they’re nationalist) – as shown in development of treatment of Ukrainian and arguably Scots. Regarding the obsessive rules of english, it should be noted that French was not as successful in making new terms and concepts unliek English – as the French language had a formal standardization organization which was obsessive about organization and which writers obeyed lest they get ‘sanctioned’ in some manner, which retarded the development and innovation of French language terms, which ws part of why the English language improved’ its’ number of vacubalary and was more effective. Arguing about the concepts of knowledge, and the fact that there are still new intrepretations present in how you view things due to new evidence is factual, as shown by new research and evidence which comes from World War II, especially with the war experiences of the Soviet Union and Nationalist China.The “tradition of antagonism” is really not surprising even while I was reading it, how some “ignant” (ignorant) people engage in some weird behaviors to “hang out with the boys”. I tended to be shut-in (sometimes) so that did not affect me a lot, and in a lot of cases I wasnt subjected to that pressure – I guess.
-
Lee McKinnis
Master Debating in Chicago’s South Side I was…
!!Master-Debating in Chicago’s South Side!!
I was a former urban debater in the Chicago Debate League (South Side!), so I have knowledge of how the debate tournaments and debate processes work. I debated for three years in the league, and enjoyed my experiences as a debater enough to like discussing it with former policy debaters from other leagues occasionally. Recently I talked to a judge over winter break of 2011 and he told me about the tournaments. I told him the site messed up and did not update the info, but then it was updated. I was able to go and judge after the update and discussing with the judge. They often recruit former debaters to judge policy rounds for them.
When many people see high school and college debaters, they often think of and reference the Policy Debaters. Policy Debate is one of the more complicated modes of debate, with “open policy” being on the opposing side of complication, open policy basically being what many would say debates on cable TV is, with people mainly speaking to each other and attempting to be as “persuasive” as possible with emotional appeals and whatnot. Lincoln-Douglas, or L-D is an even balance to many, with there being an emphasis on values and which ones are better than the other, but still requiring evidence for their arguments Policy Debate is structured, with people reading cards as evidence against each other. Policy Debate is also more evidence-based, to the point that you can argue for questionable things for this society and win based off the simple fact that you have evidence and they do not . Note that in most cases when you see on the media of ghetto high schools or magnet schools debating in urban leagues, those are policy debate leagues.
For the first tournament, I went to Bogan High School. Entering, I remembered being disoriented for a period of time while I adjusted to being in a secondary education institution, as I graduated circa 3-4 years ago. I was able to go about and adjust to the environment relatively quickly, and I talked to some of the judges and organizers . I then went and ate, with there being a semi-crowed cafeteria with not a lot of people there. I then proceeded to judge. When entering the places where the rounds happened, I was reminded of my experiences, and how immensely BORING the actual debate rounds can be, unless the debaters decide to have fun with their debates. Given I judged one of the “crappy” leagues for this tournament, AA Chicago Debate League being full of JV teams and new schools; it is in hindsight not surprising that that occurred. I still decided to judge for an AA round, which is majority black and Hispanics on the debate teams there because I am an African-American myself and grew up in Chicago’s South Side , – as a result my sense of ethnic solidarity made me “go help people like me”- and also so that I am going to basically see how it was from the POV of other people from when I was in the Debate League.
There are a team of people who basically run the debate tournament. There are the Debate Organizer(s). They are the “nerve center”, to use biological analogies. They run the systems, “trouble-shoot” problems with Judges, they tabulate the wins and losses for teams, schools and individual debaters, they collect and give out judging forms among other things. The author’s writing is bad and due to that, the organizers often write down for him for various files and for writing in general. The author often writes in block capital writing in order to alleviate that sort of problem. That tends to annoy the organizers a lot. But they run a debate tournament, so they should eat it/suck it/swallow it or whatever adjective you prefer to describe dealing with the situations. Often the Debate organizer wears a suit, which makes him or her noticeable as few others are wearing formal suits, especially in policy debate. The organizer often tends to be a little older than the debaters, or older. They are the general administrator for things. Often debate coaches take up a position of ad-hoc assistance with the administration of tournaments. Sometimes the local (“host”) debate team provides assistance with directing people to the rooms required, or with general directions for all people. Other time the “host” helpers are drill team or other students. For mid-season or end-season tournaments which are often hosted in universities, the ‘helper’ staff increases from the simple fact of multiple types of debaters and multiple leagues being a tournament, meaning money is pooled for better food, as opposed to cheetos or funyuns in some extreme desperate cases (for richer leagues subsidize poorer leagues in practice).
I began to judge for the policy debaters, and despite the suckiness of many of the debaters, I was relatively intact and coherent in thought; this was early in the debate tournament so I was not as drained or confused as what sometimes occurs in the later stages of multiple-day tournaments – especially if the debaters are not so good. The fact that this year’s cases were focusing on space exploration and colonization was also gratifying to the author. Being able to watch people argue about space exploration was nice. Unfortunately, again these were new schools so they did not provide new evidence or pull some weird cases . As you will see later, even the A debate leagues or the regionals were not much better in their relative lack of creativity
Here are some cases of some things some of the debaters have done in the Bogan Tournament. In One debate, they were setting up the cards and whatnot for the debate. The Affirmative chose a certain case. The Negative did not have the cards for that case. This is understandable, as reformatting cards while going from debate round to debate round is hard to do and overwhelming, and even when you fix the cards you might end up still having a disorganized core files in your case. I have argued for the opposing side once by reading their core files once, so that is understandable to see happen. They then choose a new case, and proceed. And now I forgot where I was going with this direction. They chose a different case . And the debate began, with the affirmative starting. At the end of the 1AF , the negative team turned around to me and said they would concede, they did not have their negative files. I pointed out they can use disadvantages, critiques, and said literally “just throw some crap out there, you have the advantage! Are you sure!” and so forth. They still said yes they wanted to concede. I was forced to accept their concession. I am not sure if this was two debates or not (I might have messed up the4 order).
There were also good debates and the debaters were all cool and nice, afterall. Not mean debaters, just sucky. But again, the tournament organizers had me judge a lot of JV debaters, though AA is mainly JV now being new and all. It’s still fun to talk to people and “help” them debate better and telling them how some of the “north side teams will do nothing but spew and spew and spew all the time” as a warning, as the AA teams tended to speak slower than the stereotypical policy debate team which is inaudible to the average person.
I was able to discuss Axis Powers Hetalia, a “comedy” “historical” anime series with someone who had an ‘Axis Powers Hetalia’ shirt however, and I discussed other anime and conventions with him and his partner, and what to expect from Anime conventions (i.e. parties and whatnot). They’ll be at the con and I will likely bump into them there – after all, I bumped into some of the South Shore debaters years after I graduated from high school at an anime convention. I admitted that most of the debaters in that league sucked horribly, as he asked me about that. He knew it and suspected the truth – that his league was utter suck and fail and noncoherent in debates. I mentioned as such it is all new teams and that is the main reason for suckiness. As to be expected, few people assumed I was a Judge due to my demeanor – which I enjoyed – saying “Oh, I’m a Judge” has brought many enjoyable responses from other individuals. Haha
I also have judged “better” leagues as well, I judged a Chicago Area Regional tournament (RCC), located in Evanston which had a few “magnet” school teams (Whitney Young, Lane Prep, etc). The skill and number of the debaters were higher, and there were more debate judges who were college students, mainly from Northwestern. For here, the debaters were more aggressive, “raking each other” for weak spots and points then attacking them if they were able, with the defenders covering themselves. During preparations for the tournaments, I ended up meeting an individual with a Guy Fawkes mask sticker on his computer, suggesting that he is a member of “Anonymous” (4chan and other imageboard posters). Upon meeting him, he was a Japanese-American My Little Pony fan, after introduction we then argued over the “faggotry” of the “Brony” fanbase
There was a note of interest, as there were a noticeable amount of redditors who were at the tournament, even the debate organizer used reddit – he referenced internet trolling. When I was in the debate leagues, I remember discussing imageboards (like 4chan), anime and related things. The idea of discussing internet things with people in real life has not changed, the difference is that reddit is the new major internet site instead of 4chan – and interestingly just as controversial as 4chan. The demographics were more “diverse”, i.e one school’s team (U of Chicago feeder) was majority (Ashkenazi? -European Jews) and some East Asians, others like Lane Tech, Whitney Young and Linkincoln Park were basically a “multicultural rainbow”. It should be noticed that the multiethnic teams functioned well and coherently in battle, and that in the case of people from Lane Tech, Whitney Young, etc they tended to be middle-class or further up in an income/class level, though naturally that is far from anything to be confirmed (one does not know ones’ friends/teammates income level from debating with them all the time!)
It is interesting to note that the judges had their own room to hide in. I personally did not use that room a lot, only when it was late and almost no one was in the cafeterias, as I just stayed in the judge’s lounge and played music + waited + slept in the meantime . I mainly talked to the actual debaters, but I DID talk to some Judges. They seemed “cold” and mean. Or it was me; some of the judges were cool actually now that I think of it. I think the ‘cold’ and ‘mean’ people all knew each other from Northwestern, or something similar. My best guess for the split-off is that the judges did not have the familiarity with Chicago Debaters or anything similar, hence the segregation given to them. Or maybe they did not want to be “bothered” or “annoyed”. I could not tell or discern.
Many of the judges in general were Northwestern University students, and all of NIU people were not from Chicago Area. There were two ~30-40 year old judges, two black people- apparently a couple and former debaters from Morgan Park in ~1980s. It was refreshing to see fellow Chicago debaters, or more accurately former Chicago debaters there. Also, discussing Korean history with a Korean woman who was there as well as journalism and its’ applications in man-made calamities (i.e. the Ukrainian Holodomor, Soviet mass-rape in WWII against Nazi Germany, and the Rwandan Genocide). She read the actual A Woman in Berlin novel and remembered the part when I asked her about the scene with the main character translating for a Soviet Russian soldier to tell the German civilians in the bombed-out Berlin apartment about his personal experience of the Eastern Front. We also discussed “modern” Japanese and Korean history, and some interesting forms of xenophobia and nationalism in modern Korea.
Now, I will discuss some of the debates for the Evanston Tournament. As mentioned earlier, there were better debaters on here. IT is fun to see how here the debaters will try to persuade you why you should judge for their side, and will try to persuade you even AFTER the debate ends. This is novel, and technically illegal. Apparently for the regionals it is allowed for judges to disclose who wins or loses in which debate rounds given how every time the debaters asked me to tell them my results.
In order to be a debate judge, one must be a neutral decision maker – especially in policy debate (open policy is less neutral). As a result you will have to listen to and judge in favor of arguments you personally dislike. Due to this, I voted for a team who advocated preserving American Imperialism and placing “rods from god” type weapons in low earth orbit, as a decline in American imperialism could risk a nuclear war. I personally disagreed with that, but the team (University of Chicago feeder/private school) defeated the other side due to having better arguments and focusing on the main targets. This is also probably illegal too, but there were some cases where I allowed the debaters to partially decide their speaker points as well – after all I am only a judge, not an infallible authority. That was also my judging habits in general too, telling people “remember, I’m only a Judge – the only difference between me and you is I was in the league a few years ago, I’m not invincible or all-knowing” when mentioning my advice and information. As I do not feel the right to bully people or say “this is the only way to judge things”. I am also a “flow” (technical) judge and I am okay with the debaters choosing the specifics of debates. Do they want to tag team? Do they want me to do more of a technical judge? A lay judge? I am not a strong obsessive over having everything timed down to the second, and I actually like some fun and crazy things used in policy debates, as it is not boring and also fun for all. Debaters can curse to their heart’s content I don’t care. Interestingly enough, some other judges and whatnot believed that I was too friendly a judge and not “mature” in my judging style, which will be discussed later.
While judging you can find interesting things in the closet too. And enjoy some good food and beverages, if the organizers provide it, which they tend to. Better to take free food than to allow it to spoil!
I went to another AA league tournament, and it was useful but short. The author received some college information, recognized some people and received some information for other colleges. Some guy compared me to some ghetto/gangbanger who wore the Domo stuff as well. But that was it from that short tournament. I went to a middle school tournament as well, but my teeth messed me up and I left, though not before talking to this team from Chinatown about “Black Rock Shooter after mention one of them wearing a ‘Pikachu’ hat….
There was one other debate tournament I have gone to, this one is an A tournament, interestingly ay my former high school – Chicago Ag. Things were ready, I arrived and noticed some of the same people I remember from being in the league – at least, the Judges. There was no one from when I was in the league who was a debater. My former team has completely turned over. I was one of the original debaters in my high school, and the team was ¼ African-American or so. Note the ‘original’ team was just 4 people, but later me and some other “minorities” were in the team, so there was not a dominating amount of European-descended people on the team. From the few times I checked on my former high school team, the ratio stayed about the same (a few Arabs, some blacks, some mestizo Hispanics, etc). I returned and have not seem my old debate team in 2 years, since a “mid season” tournament I went to in that time. Then there were people who remembered me, both in “my” team and in other teams, and someone’s sister who I debated with was there. No longer. The entire team seems to have changed, from what little I saw. All the coaches I knew from my school retired or did something different, but one still does some contact or assistance. The demographic has changed, to only white people representing my former team in debate tournaments, as far as I could tell – presumably debaters from the Mount Greenwood neighborhood, as a majority of the white students in my high school came from Mount Greenwood, rumors suggesting due to nepotistic reasons with local school councils . I am not sure that is the entire debate team, but that is what I saw in that tournament, and I went “well, I don’t recognize anyone there!”. I did mention to some debaters during a tournament of the actions one of the older debaters took, and to avoid it (to be discussed later).
My first debate to judge for the day was amazing! I arrived at the classroom where the debate was to happen, the room of my former law teacher senior year of high school. We set up, I got access to the internet FINALLY as the computers at tournaments tended to be password-protected and annoying. But that was over, and I discussed and set up things with the debaters, writing in as coherent a writing style as I can on the judging tablets. Then, one of the debaters, a short mexican girl with glasses notices my Hetalia shirt. We got up and hugged and went “OMG HETALIA YOU WATCH IT TOO HAVE YOU SEEN DURARARA ITALY-KUUUN IS SO KAWAII PASTAAAAAA~” and on and on, while the other team looked at us like we were “devil-worshippin”. Her partner was all like “WTF” as well, it was awesome.
But after a few minutes, we remembered we were supposed to debate, and began debating. Naturally the other team saw the erm, enthusiasm I had for Anime. As a result, the debate quickly turned into the Debaters on BOTH SIDES referencing things like Dragon Ball Z, Gundam, Static Shock and all sorts of things. One side began by mentioning that “if our plan is not passed, we will all die and we will never see the dub for Fruits Basket, or a new Gundam Series, or all sorts of new anime to come out. Do you want to see that, Judge?” with the opposing team going “Vote for the Negative, as a Vote for the Negative is for Goku and Dragon Ball Z” and whatnot. I was enjoying this debate thoroughly, and I was flowing both arguments and how they intersected.
The anime fangirl then focused more of the exploration benefits of passing her case, and how space exploration will lead to a new era of humanity with no baggage of human racism and conflicts on Earth, things straight out of science fiction media . The debate ended, and naturally I judged for the fangirl with science-fiction arguments, as I like voting for plans that make me think that I will lead a fleet of spaceships to explore space, colonize new worlds and engage enemy warships at distances of millions of kilometers using 30,000 ship fleets. I told the team who lost – a debater from the team that did not have the fangirl that “You bullshitted extremely well. You really bullshitted fucking well. You KNEW you were bullshitting and still behaved as if nothing was out of the ordinary” (she dropped most arguments the fangirl team made and ignored them). “Due to this bullshit, you get the highest speaker awards!” she asked me to submit her for a “best debater” award, and I did so. Naturally I phrased it nicer than saying “she bullshitted and acted like she was truthful” but it was still fun. Later on, we continued our internet-laden conversation and I’ll probably see the fangirl around ACEN too like the other people mentioned earlier.
Speaking of fun and crazy debates, I was considered immensely informal in my debate judging at least bt the organizers. I tended to scare them a bit. In hindsight, I scared them A LOT – Mainly a David Song, the main organizer for everything but the regionals. A ‘Duane Fish’ did the organization for the Regionals, and he was the redditor who referenced trolling in one of the tournament awards ceremonies. Yeah. Well, here is one example. This is the same tournament at Chicago Ag, and it was later in the day. It was an elimination round. The round was a Chicago Ag Team against Von Steuben. This is where the ‘me telling them about one of the original debaters’ and the ‘I am too immature in judging’ threads from earlier in the paper link together. The debates happened, Chicago Ag argued for the “orbital solar arrays which microwave energy to earth” plan. Von Steuben argued against it. The debate ended. They came out and were commenting. We all were. In elimination rounds, there are three to five judges instead of one judge, so a majority would vote for or against a plan. We were giving out critiques. One of the other judges was all “I noticed, you don’t go after them too hard. You should point out ‘they don’t know what they’re talking about’ if you see it”. I added in to “be careful about that, as I knew someone who in an cross-ex argument with someone, and he ended up getting into a “so you have the bigger dick huh” to which the response was “yeah”, naturally with “whip it out then!”. The other judges felt disgusted at that statement I made (both teams were all females, and other debaters were female). I pointed out “That actually happened, and that’s something for you all to avoid and be careful of”. I also mentioned that this was one of the original founders of the Ag School Debate team as I was with him then. The organizer naturally wasn’t too happy when he heard about that, and mentioned that I tended to be very animated and was too ‘close’ to the debaters instead of being ‘mature’ and whatnot. But it was still true, it’s hard to deny (actually it can be denied – being years old and not recorded, but still). As shown from this paper, Debate can be amazingly boring, or it can be amazingly fun. It can be both, both for the debates AND the Judges or other organizers. And remember, this is only the CHICAGO Debate League – there are suburban leagues, MULTIPLE suburban leagues as well as things like “Catholic League” and whatelse.
When you are in a debate team you can call yourself a “master-debater” as a joke. Even without being in a debate team it is fun to refer to oneself as master-debating in groups in public. As it is fun and good social activity.
Regarding Issues (At least for Chicago Urban Debate), yes there were some issues I remember from my time as a debater in the league, but I am not sure about there being such issues now. I remember there was more of a noticeable difference between north and south side teams in different leagues (class etc), but I do not notice that now in the league, as it is more of “new teams” which are on the south side which are in the ‘lower’ leagues. But there is definitely a class and city-side aspect to the classifications, most of the AA teams were South and West Side and most of the A teams were magnet and north side teams. I am not as sure as to how the Regionals pay for their tournaments, but it appears that at least some of their money comes from personal contributions from the debaters’ families and coaches.
Fixing that would require more money invested into debate teams, or the AA teams providing money for their debaters via family assistance (which does happen). After all, plenty of debaters have their own money and print out stuff by themselves using their money. There were also things I remember from the past, dealing with laptops. They banned the usage of laptops years ago as they were naturally an “unfair” advantage, but they changed it to “if you bring a laptop, bring another for the other team to see it and allow them to access your files
Also, as shown from my writings earlier, a lot (some) of the debate staff is pretty “conservative” in how to judge or debate. I got away with doing some fun things, like using image macros to argue for my point . One issue I see is the debaters are not having as much fun or weird things with their case as I Would do. But that is MY opinion and not exactly undisputable fact that “y’all suck and should get weird now!” That will delay things and make debate less attractive, remember Model UN has a reputation of simulating governments from fiction and whatnot (i.e. the TV show ‘24’).Debating about contemporary issues “in real life” is fun and a good attraction, but so is having fun! At least for me, and I KNOW there are the EXTREMELY serious people who focus on flows, speaker points and winning. But I’m not them so meh!
The future of Policy Debate does seem something interesting to look into. Remember that 100 years ago, in the 1912 year or around that era, a majority of Policy Debaters were rich, white males from “prestigious” universities. In related comparisons, the First Model UNs were set up in “Ivy League” schools after the first World War, but then they were “model League of Nations”. I know someone who was in Model UN, and in his case it is majority black and Hispanic in his case, or in other meetings it is a “rainbow of races”. There is also a difference in technology and culture, after all I am sure the old traditionalists of the past would not rap in their debates. Some do that now. I am lumping model UN and Policy Debate together for a purpose. Now, in the future you will likely see more international policy debaters, as there ARE international policy debates between other countries, say in Southeast Asia. It will be interesting to see how people would debate in the future. Would they so their debates in Mandarin? After all, compare how in Europe a large portion of people, especially the younger people can speak English very well. There are some sub-leagues for international competition for those who speak English as a second language, or even foreign language speakers. I wonder how the rules would change with say, online conferencing and subtitles provided by translation programs, or other new technologies like say a telepathic link. Maybe people would argue for “common knowledge” by mentally scouring the internet for hits and responses, or something similar like that. A Cyberpunk future indeed!
Imagine you debating with a Russian who came off the plane from Russia, or a Nigerian or Egyptian Arab in some competition with subtitled videos, about the morality of the independence of the Lunar Colonies from “Earth Imperialism” In a city which has mile-high skyscrapers, helipads everywhere as well as floating (mag-lev) train systems. This is an example, and ties more in with the idea of “the future is cool” however. Regarding how these tournaments would happen (or ARE happening!) there are similar things like “Mathlete” competitions that I remember which might be used for a ‘rule’ to follow, as well as international conventions in general (i.e. DefCon, a giant hacker convention held yearly in Las Vegas). This could be a future for Policy Debate. Or not. I’ll likely be dead by then anyways, assuming I am not cryogenically frozen or something weird happens with accelerated technical change – granted that is happening already.Recently as in December of 2011
The author has heard a judge who judged L-D as complaining about the excessive “bullshit” that L-D debaters often focus on or argue with, and the lack of evidence that L-D debaters use and focus on, instead focusing on dressing nicely and arguing morally nice. As an urban policy debater, my response was “LOL”. Also, the judge’s opinion that people who don’t dress up get judges more harshly is sucky in my opinion, but that is what L-D debaters do so their problem.
”Cards” is used as policy debate for the evidence read during debate, apparently originated from the fact that they LITERALLY used cards to read from originally apparently
The Author has denied the holocaust in front of a Jewish Judge and a Polish girl in policy debate, in response to a “genocide denial” case/plan applied by the opposing team. As the author and his team has evidence, while the opposing team did not have any evidence to argue “the holocaust happened”, the author’s team won that case. The author and his teammate hugged the girl after the round ended to remind her “it’s just a debate”.
The opposing team also did not argue for “common evidence”, a legitimate argument – i.e. so-called “obvious” things that exist in our universe, like the Sun is Orangish-Red, The Sky is blue, and the Earth has a natural satellite roughly one sixth of the Earth’s mass do not need evidence for it.
This IS an Urban Debate League, after all. Note the author is referring to majority African-American and “Latino” high schools.
Master-Debater pun on “masturbator” pun, which is old and overused in some cases, but still fun to refer to oneself as a “master-debater”
AA – “Double-A”. Not as Good as Single-A in classification. Early in the history of the Chicago Debate League, there was a division between AAA (“Triple-A”), AA, and A (“Single-A”) with Regionals. Now (as of writing) there is only AA, A and Regionals but the league has expanded to creating elementary school teams/leagues. Sometimes far-out (as in Illinois St Louis suburbs) or private suburban novice teams or teams kicked out of a league participate in the Chicago Debate Leagues
JV – Junior Varsity. These are novice debaters, first year debaters
Hanging out with the niggaz, basically
Grew up in Chicago proper, close to 98th/cottage grove – Rosemoor/Roseland border zone. Now lives in Beverly (still Chicago), close to Vincennes.
“Chicken Scratch” is one term used, another term is “chicken shit”. This is why the author types most of his papers in general, and would bring and use a laptop if possible during Policy Debate rounds when he was a debater. Failing that, the author’s teammate would “flow” the debate.
A debater the author knew ended up getting some sort of seizure or had general “Tweaking” from drinking large quantities of energy drinks and sugar, the tweaking really took hold in the later stages of the second day of the tournament. Other debaters apparently use Marijuana in order to soothe themselves in long tournaments. Given debaters, depending on how long the tournament goes can end up spending massive amounts of time in debates, running from rooms, talking to many people, helping other debaters, “improvising” research, etc – not surprising that drugs are needed to go on and on. Rumors suggest some college debaters get extremely drunk while debating at times, in a “joking” manner.
debate tournaments can be as long as Friday 8AM -9PM, Saturday 8AM-11PM, Sunday 8AM-4PM. Fun too, for those into that subculture.
New Evidence is used when people get tired of arguing for the same thing over and over again. As a result, people will make new cases from researching and create a new “plan” which the evidence is made around for new and creative debates.
The Author posts on science-fiction and alternate-history forums, when not being banned for forum trolling or being a “sock” account of a troll account discovered and being banned. There was not such an emphasis on building giant space fleets to fight off the alien invaders who are threatening earth, or building a giant particle cannon which would be able to destroy any invading forces which approach the Lunar Fortress Network. There were new cases like “orbital solar arrays which microwave energy to earth” but that is more practical, not out-of-the-way science-fiction.
Regionals in Chicago Debate League are Chicago Magnet Schools + some other Chicago schools + nearby schools like Niles/Evanston/Oak Park teams + the occasional private team like University of Chicago filler schools or w/e. There are dedicated suburban debate teams (Policy Debates, L-D, Open Policy, etc).
Like the Model UN, people can submit awesome/crazy/stupid depending on your POV plans. As an example, the author has created an “Autistic Lunar Space Colony” plan for some debaters he knew this year.
The side which is arguing FOR something
Reorganizing hundreds of pages of paper, if you have paper is annoying. Especially given some people bring giant tubs of evidence printed out which is massive to the point of requiring lifters and wheelbarrows to carry around on tournaments. Yes, giant tubs full of researched evidence some people provide. Note that does not mean they automatically win, but they can spew a lot more.
The basic cases, and the arguments for and against them for a certain debate season are given to all debaters either physically in the form of a giant stack of paper or electronically in the form of a PDF or Word file.
Cases are plans the debaters argue for/again. In this case, they were arguing FOR a debate. Affirmatice Argues FOR a case and can choose a case. Negative can only attack the enemy’s case, but has an advantage and the ability to attack the morality/logic behind the case in “critic” files as well as make up weird “bad side-effect” plans, i.e. “Disads”.First Affirmative Rebuttal, the first rebuttal in a debate round, and the first round where the debaters are supposed to abandon their evidence and focus more on attacking the enemy’s position and defending them more “freely” – without the evidence to weigh them down, but still useful as a defensive shield.
Spew means in this context to say as many things as possible, reading as much evidence as possible. Aka “Speed reading” – this is done when the debaters are trying to say as much evidence as possible in the slotted timespan for the construct portions of the debate. Constructs are when debaters spew all their evidence.
“Oh, YOU’RE a Judge! You look so Young xD” type responses.
The newest My Little Pony series: Friendship is Magic attracted a lot of 20-30 something male fans, who referred to themselves as “Bronies” – apparently a large percentage of the “Bronies”, at least originally did not have any connection to the Japanese animated subculture, so they had some need to prove their masculinity while watching “girl’s cartoons” -male anime watchers in general aren’t so macho-posturing – hence the “Bro” in “Brony”. That and the original “Bronies” being 4chan (and reddit, the author believes) users.
”Faggotry” in the internet definition is multifaceted, and not even used in a homophobic manner. As an example, referring to someone as a “fag” can be a term of endearment (“sup faggot!”), a neutral suffix denotating characterics of an individuals (he’s been a chicagofag all his life), or an insult, often with homophobic tendencies (“you’re a fucking faggot”). Given this was in the context of My Little Pony fanbase, and their obsessive behavior on internet forums, it was intended as an insult. Note that even when used as an insult, calling someone a “faggot” does not literally mean “the person is homosexual”, just as calling someone a “motherfucker” in Ebonics does not literally mean “that person engages in sexual intercourse with their mother”.
Internet submission site like slashdot or digg, it has become a giant forum as well as a place to submit random things. Users are called “redditors”.
Forums where you do not have to register to post there, and where people upload images. Has a reputation for generating most internet memes currently, also the larger imageboards are generally nasty places to visit, to phrase it formally…. 4chan is the largest English imageboard, but there are larger Japanese-language imageboards.
Food and drinks are given out for free, and often debaters and judges tend to take some food back home with them. The Author filled his bookbag with Sprite pop cans two days in a row walking to the El train back to the City’s South Side. It was enough for a week of drinking. Unfortunately, the organizers did not allow the author to walk out with several pizzas in tow. Yes, regular debaters do this – the author used to jack large quantities of potato chips and drinks when he was in the league as a debater
The author only watched the movie and mentioned as such
Known in the former USSR as “The Great Patriotic War”. One of the nastiest wars in modern history. The soldier said “The German Army entered my village, took all the children and killed them by bashing their heads against the wall”. Upon the translator/main character asking if he heard rumors, the soldier responded “I saw it myself”.
it appears that in regionals, there are a few extra judges on standby, or coaches take the place of judges – often people who are relatively late go to report for the next round to find out someone else took their position judging.
”Rods from God” is a term for a low earth weapons system where literal ropds of tungsten or some other metal are kept aloft held by satellites, and in order to function as a weapon the “rods” would be dropped from orbit into a general location of Earth. The energy of something of that mass hitting the Earth’s surface as the speeds which things enter the atmosphere are theorized to create an explosion equivalent to a small nuclear weapon (presumably, at least kilotons) – without the fallout and other radioactivity – i.e. alpha/beta/gamma particles.
Points which are used to measure how good a speaker is and how well they pronounciate words. Their “swagga” in general is judged via speaker points in policy debate. Note that some judges will subtract points from rude or violent debaters, the author does not do such.
“flow” as I write down the debate progress, an action known as “flowing”. The author tends to do this more often to accommodate debaters.
During Cross-examinations, two debaters on one side can answer one debater’s question, or two debaters can question one debater. This is tag team. Often allowed so that both sides are more ‘equal’ in their debate skills, but that can be a disadvantage for one debater if this configuration allows a “maverick” – a single debater to get gangbanged by a debate team of two debaters.
“The Affirmative dropped a certain argument and the Affirmative’s Solvency outweighs the Negative’s Disadvantage, therefore the Affirmative wins”. This treats Policy Debate more like a card game. The author will use Yu-Gi-Oh as a good example due to the “trap” cards activated. A debater can use a “Weak” source or something to hope their oppositions pounces on it, only to be blown away with overwhelming firepower in response.
Lay Judges are considered to be “Crappy” judges who are not familiar with the structure of policy debate – I have never personally seen that but it is possible and apparently happens enough that one of the common things is catering to “lay” judges, i.e. judges who would easily be persuaded by rhetoric and will need debaters to “hold their hand” with the structure of policy debate.
I told the people I was judging “hey there’s a bunch of alcohol here, if you need it” when I found some alcohol openly displayed in one of the classrooms where debates were happened. We all laughed at that.
Speaking of free food, an interesting fact which I was able to discern was that, at least in the case of the Evanston tournament, Regionals was paid from family donations from what I could discern, i.e. some of the parents and whatnot paid for all the debate team and some of the tournament expenses OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKET. From what I could see, given in cases personal checks were used in payment.
I assumed he was a hipster until told otherwise, as A LOT OF PEOPLE IVE SEEN WHO WEARS DOMO TENDS TO BE A HIPSTER. But no, he’s a skater/street dude. Knew some people like that, and pretty sure I angered one of them before haha.
Nepotism becoming more blatant recently, Chicago Ag has increased the ratio of “locals” – i.e. Mount Greenwood people who go to that school as compared to city-wide people. There still is a lottery and admission tests, but it is interesting given arguments over the choice of principals and who did the most work and random drama the author will not segue into.
The author wanted to install Ubuntu Linux or Backtrack Linux, free Operating Systems and be able to use the computer that way by “booting” (running) the operating system from the CD without installing anything. As the author’s laptop is broken and that is annoying to deal with.
The author is serious, that happened, or the author remembers is as such. Remember the other debaters had a “WTF” reaction to this discussion.
Writing down the arguments both sides made, people write down a “flow” sheet to write down the things and to see that your side in a debate covered the arguments the other side made and did not forget anything. Judges and neutral observers flow in order to keep some coherent thought on the process of the debate and who dropped which arguments or which arguments were “buried” – overwhelmed with counterarguments that they are not salvageable in debate and are therefore “Dead”.
not using her ‘real’ name
The Author recommends the readers to play Sins of a Solar Empire and Gratuitous Space Battles if possible. The Author also recommends watching Battlestar Galactica (old) and Outlaw Star. The author cannot think of any written science fiction which conveys the feeling I believe the debater was appealing to for her cases, but there are many space opera science fiction books which the author has imbibed some of.
I did not tell them who won or lost, I THINK I did not tell them who won/lost.
Acronym for Anime CENtral. Largest Midwestern anime convention, yearly.
The person who said that almost got into a fight with another debater over a woman which he was apparently “sexually harassing”. The dude said “If I see him harassing her, it’s gonna be a fight”. Remember, some people have stabbed each other with pens in elimination rounds because they LOST the round, based off rumors. Given my knowledge of the person in question and hie behavior, it is undeniable that he WOULD do that in a debate tournament (the “dick whipping” comments).
there was no problem with question of interest, I did not know anyone as stated earlier – so judging “my” former school was not a problem. Some people who set up the food were the younger sister or related to people I knew, but they were not debating.
The honor system applies here apparently. That no one would delete your files or harass them or plant a virus or furry porn on your computer there. Which is true, it works. The author has not heard of cases of people putting viruses or sabotaging others’ computers….yet!
Cute cats work well for some cases, people saying things printed out work out better in other cases. Note this is referring to the author’s experiences as a DEBATOR and NOT as a JUDGE.
The people who pretend to represent countries and whatnot. IT is roleplaying as countries. Imagine Superpower or Hearts of Iron, minus the “being able to command nuclear weapons or military forced in general”
Science fiction with “high tech and low life” – it’s near-future science fiction which focuses more on the internet, cybernetics and social ramifications of new technology. The term “cyberspace” originated from a cyberpunk novel (“Neuromancer”)
The skilled math people who do random calculation and high level math in competitions. -
Lee McKinnis
Information is meant to be free, yo! No in many cases I dont know what I think I know, I just think I know what I know! Erm, I could have phrased that beter but it seems semi-coherent so I shall preserve it! The difference between “opinion” or “Belief” in comparison to “history” is very true. I’ve gotten into enough arguments or debates with people online, annd the person said something along the lines of “fuck your books” or something similar. And My response is more of “wow, that’s your answer” (-___-) in response. Or I point out “well, this is all we have for proof of evidence or information” or some other detailed fight. When it gets to that point, we are insulting each other off the internet or something similar. I laughed at the guy who mentioned stormfront as an example odf some baised sources which try to be neutral. Stormfront has some interesting discussions, but some rerally weird ones on World War II. I have seen Russian/Belarusian/Ukrainian/Polish Stormfront posters argue with US/UK/Canadian posters on how “pro-white” Hitler was, ans how good Hitler was for “the white race”. Naturally the Slavic posters point out Hitler’s anti-Slavis policies put into action (“let’s kill 1/3rd of Belarus, yay!) and the US/UK/Canadian posters are all “hitler got rid of the Jews, he got rid of decadant pornography” etc etc. And when it comes to Soviet mass-rape and other atrocities in the end of WWII, many stormfront posters blame the Central Asian (Kazak, Turkmen, etc) soldiers in the Soviet Army when the most rape happened by second-wave Soviet Ukrainian and Belarusian soldiers who ealt with Nazi German aggression, i.e. slavs, i.e. “white” people in the stormfront view. There are other cases of qrguable and questionable sources. I remember hearing that the Jews were heavily involved int he slavery of African individuals during the Maafa (African holocaust). I looked up information of the Jewish involvement, and the only two groups who I were able to find information on that were white nationalist groups, like the stormfront posters and the nation of islam organization, which also is not the most neutral source. I asked the posters on an alternate-history forum if they heard of more information about that, and mentioned “If I end up referencing this in a debate, I want to be sure that this is true – and all i’ve seen for research sources on these aren’t very neutral sources” or something along that line (i.e. “is this true, as the sources ive seen weren’t the best ones). Others said they were not able to find out any information, and therefore I can surely say that is pretty much rumors which I have not found any proof of, and not useful to use in an academic context. Interviewing or talking to people who experienced things can be useful too, I have information on the atomic bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki and talked to people on forums about that experience (one person did his post-graduate thesis paper on if it was required who I corresponded on a forum), but I ended up “bumping” into a hikabusha (bomb survivor) who was doing interviews and explaning her experiences at an anime convention I went to. It was a bit awkward and sad going from a hihg-pitches happy convention to listening about nuclear attacks and wars from first-hand experience, even though you read the interesting stories of people who worked on the weapons, researched them, etc. And the experiences of the people who dropped the nuclear weapons would be different than those who researched/developed the weapons (recordings of the interviews with both groups of invididuals show that), which would be different than the experiences of people who had nuclear weapons dropped on them.
DeVillez, Eric R, Michael McGuire, Thomas P. Dow, Troy A. Swanson. “Why White Rice? Thinking Through Writing”. Kendall Hunt. 2010. Print -
Lee McKinnis
Letter to Editor.
It is a good thing that the G8 has been moved away from Chicago. The citizens of Chicago would not have wanted to pay for the police and pseudo-military forces that would have been deployed to protect the powers that be. In the past, they did not want to pay for the Olympics, at least not the south and west sides of the city, the sides of the city which would have suffered the most from the Olympics. Destruction of neighborhoods for stadiums? Ignoring the will of the citizens? Emperor Daley II tried this and failed. It seems that Rahm Emmanel, who was an influential and rich banker wants to go in the same general discussion in overruling the citizens’ will. Why should the inhabitants of Chicago’s south and west sides, for example pay for the people and structures who would support their economic and social destruction? Why should I have to put up with increased government control and restrictions which will not go away even when the summit does?-
Alex Velez
Hey Lee, I read your letter to the editor and I have a couple of comments for you in the future. You did Stay local and timely describing the g8 summit and how you where glad it was moved away from Chicago. I don’t understand the connection of the following quote and your letter, it seems kind of vague “Why should I have to put up with increased government control and restrictions which will not go away even when the summit does?”Also, “Tie your letter to a recent event or previous article/editorial/letter to the editor.” Comparing the Recent g8 summit to the Olympics fails make a connection. We never had an Olympics and you pose a rhetorical question “destruction of neighborhoods for stadiums?” I don’t see the connection and the statement “ignoring the will of the citizens” when you mention “the south and the west sides of the city didn’t want to pay for the Olympics” I also went to http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/01/16/economist-natog8-summits-could-be-a-disaster/ to see local reaction and got a lot of feed back as to what the fears are in peoples responses.
Although your letter was very brief I didn’t see a connection with Olympics and the g8 summit. I don’t recall a major controversial event like the g8 ever coming to the Chicago land area that you can actually compare the g8 to. Maybe if you can find something like the g8 in recent years that were documented in having a negative affect or even the g8 visiting other US cities in recent years. This would strongly support your message. Your main idea was presented in the first sentence. you could use more relevant facts such as mentioned above with other cities that hosted g8 summits. You are border line ranting throughout your letter making theoretical claims and they need to be backed up with more fact. Statements like “emperor daily”, and describing Rahm Emmanuel as a “rich banker wants to go in the same general discussion in overruling the citizens’ will.” Ultimately, you could use a lot more comparisons as this isn’t the first g8 summit to be held in a city. I found a lot of insight in the link above just listening to people’s fears on the subject and non fears. This prompted me to look a little more in detail on my own to seek out more facts.-
Lee McKinnis
There were articles which said that a lot of the “Security” plans for Chicago would stay AFTER ths meeting happened. i.e. increased penalties and jail times is staying.
when I referred to the Olympics, I meant when Daley tried to force the Olympics and wanted Chicago to host it despite a large portion of people disagreeing with that plan and vocally opposing it in city councils and community meetings (ESPECIALLY in the neighborhoods which would be bulldozed for the projects).
-
-
-
Lee McKinnis
speech: Terrorism
what is terrorism
why do people become terrorists
ways to solve terrorism
open societies, freedom and lack of suppression helps
people disconnected from societies are more willing to become terrorists – those unmarried or attached in any way.
would you become a terrorist if in their situations
why terrorism is a threat to societies.
-
Lee McKinnis
For the case of Chapter 3, you can see a noticeable example of sexism against males. A female grad student dismissed the stories and lives of the male characters in some victorian novels, focusing only on the status of females in this society. Assuming that they were only the background and not mattering is an example of this double-standard. But the author was able to defeat his opponent with massive amounts of evidence and other information in a massive coordinated assault, i.e. his thesis paper which did prove his opponent wrong. Yes, many feel inadequate. I feel completely incompetent and at times wanting to quit college or commit suicide or do something because “I Feel like a failure at life” (this is not a threat! It is Hyperbole!). Especially given issues with composition and some math courses. But the “do the impossible believe in yourself go defeat the snakes on a plane” mentality does help. Watching Snakes on a Plane or Gurren LAgann or any manner of absurd idealized action movies or other media will help you too. As it will make you feel happy and awesome and willing to do awesome things, and hopefullly you do not end up qith “Beer muscles” and try to flip a car over and break your back in the process. And this fits in with the “how is your life? Could it be better?” Well the author has the adsvantage of being born into a rich (at least middle-class) family with business degrees and presumably connections. There are plenty of poorer and less priviledged people who would not be able to do thing. But the author was, so is that possible? Yes. The “why money wont cut it” sub-text/essay might be an argument as to why human sociwty has increased from extreme physical violence to less violent societies as humans have educated themselves. However, that statement is unnessarily Eurocentric, and there are those who argue that preliterate societies were VERY non-violent in their practices. The author’s obsessive (OCD-esque? Autistic-esque? catalogues of evidence and info is somethin I do, but again it is for more alternate-worlds based things with the timelines of how hypothetical wars break out (i.e. changing my “World war” timelines to where the WWI begins instead from Austro-Hungarian Empires ends up in a civil war due to the ‘Ausgeleich’ between Austria and Hunhary failing in 1917, leading to a civil war with Russia and Serbia backing up the Slavs and the Ottomans and Germany backing up Austria, as well as a Spanish Civil War which lasts until WWII – with Spain occupied by Nazi Germany as well as an expansed Soviet Union controlling Iran, Afghanistan and modern-day Pakistan incorporating them as full Soviet Socialist Republics.Those are examples. So focusing on that (younger siblings without priviledge in families) was good for the author, as the author was in that sort of position before. When referring to the “the idea will come to you” response, the responder saying that “it will come to you” is too close to “use the force” was hilarious. As I tell people “may the force be with you” often! And you can argue that at times the force will NOT be with you and that you will fail and likely die. Yo can also argue that the force WIL be with you when you are able to dodge the scary beings and to break through the threats to your existence and not only survive, but win ad thrive in victory over your opponents.
— DeVillez, Eric R, Michael McGuire, Thomas P. Dow, Troy A. Swanson. “Why White Rice? Thinking Through Writing”. Kendall Hunt. 2010. Print -
Lee McKinnis
Terrorism – A Social Issue Car Bombs igniting…
Terrorism – A Social Issue.
1.
Car Bombs igniting/detonating – killing dozens of people in the immediate area. Insurgents shooting and engaging government forces. Partisans setting off mines to delay Tank advances. Secessionists conducting bush-wacking operations. All are examples that many will consider to be terrorism, likely due to the aspect of non-state actors resisting the overwhelming force of state authority and militaries. However many people consider terrorism to be a different thing than just that. After all, a large portion of history has had national-separatist movement resort to terrorism for their independence. And those nationalist-separatists tend to call themselves “freedom fighters” – hence the “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” quote which is used by many nationalists for their wars of independence against colonialist powers.
-
Killian Noonan
Hello Lee, I bid you greetings as we are not in the same peer review group your essay caught my eye. Particularly because I had speculations that you would include something about the Irish people’s struggle. Not discoursing your paper by any means there was just the on crucial sentence that I just had to clarify with you. The abuses of the English towards the Irish has ended with an independent Irish state, and the British government has negotiated with IRA members themselves.” Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe this was your only sentence in your essay regarding Anglo-Irish relations. However, a couple things in this sentence caught my eye. First of all the English abuse towards the Irish people has done everything but end. Yes the establishment of an Irish free state did happen in 1921 after the War of Independence and the Irish indeed freed twenty six of their counties. Although the six counties up north remain to be freed from the British occupation. Thus the twenty-sox counties in the Republic of ireland unified with the six counties up north would make a full united thirty-two county sovereign nation. Which interestingly enough the struggle for the goal has all but ended. If you are interested in this matter more, read my essay this is exactly what I talked about. I just wanted to note that the abuses have all but ended, and although there have been talks and “negotiations,” there are indeed many people and organizations who continue to take up the cause in the struggle for Ireland’s freedom. All in all I though it was a great paper. It is a controversial matter, as you can see people like myself will jump up to defend their cause. Though I like your quote “one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.” Which I believe is very true and accurate to say. Also it was good in the first paragraph you through in information about separatist groups who are deemed freedom fighters, because they are involved in a struggle of independence again colonial powers. It was very informative and well written. You looked at both sides of the spectrum, especially regarding the struggle of the Palestinian people against Israeli forces. An enjoyable paper to read! Slán go fóill mo chara.Tiocfaidh ár lá
-
Lee McKinnis
Where do the English still abuse the Irish in Northern Ireland though? AFAIK the UK government now basically will throw money and do anything to keep northern ireland from collapsing into a low grade civil war like during “the troubles”. From what I remember, at first the unionists protested the British Army coming into Northern ireland then things reversed during ‘the troubles’ (i.e. bloody sunday) and the paramilitaries came out.
-
Killian Noonan
The abuse by the tyrannical British presence is ever so present. The current situation is the British colonial police known to me as the dutiful RUC. Though things such as the Good Friday agreement would like to have people such as you and I believe that the new PSNI is the new face to policing in Northern Ireland. However as far as I’m concerned and others in the wider Irish republican community, different name same aim. That aim is to intimidate, harass, and arrest Irish republicans on a constant basis. The Troubles to corrct you was not a civil war. It was a war between Britain and its allies (the Loyalist) against the Irish republicans/nationalist. Indeed during the beginning of the Troubles the Irish people from nationalist/republican community were jubilant at the coming of the British forces to prevent the RUC leading Loyalist mobs into republican areas. However at the same time much caution was present. For it was not until that the many IRA volunteers armed themselves and defended the areas that continued to face an onslaught by the Loyalist mobs. Such action resulted in the Falls Road curfew. However, this was met with resistance because the Irish people have every right to defend themselves from their enemies. The Brits that were deployed to Northern Ireland in 1969 showed their true colors. What was suppose to be a three week operation, of calming down the escalating chaos turned out to be a forty year war. The Falls Road curfew was only the start. You had internment without trial in 1971 that is still in effect to this day against republicans. You also had the Ballymurphy massacre of 1971. Bloody in 1972 and the list goes on of the atrocities committed by the British in Ireland. Things were already starting to reverse not long after the British troops were deployed to keep the peace. The atrocities above only added more fuel to the fire. Even today regardless of the continued police harassment, or the internment of republicans, you have a prison struggle. Where Irish republican POWs are being denied their basic civil and human rights just like when there was a prison struggle in during the Troubles. 1981 saw the year that ten comrades died on hungerstrike. Of course the British are going to pump money into the Northern Irish economy. The British were not stupid during the Anglo-Irish treaty in keeping the six counties in the North of Ireland. Belfast City alone makes well over one billion pounds for the British. Not to mention the commercial and economic value that is there, along with some of the best farmland in the country. So I hope I cleared up for you where the oppressive British presence is still abusive. Feel free to ask me more if you wish to clarify mo chara.
-
-
-
Tom Rybovic
I really enjoyed reading about the research you conducted about terrorism. That is such a broad term that I find very hard to describe. Many people have only one way of looking at terrorism and it is what they have seen and heard on TV. I believe that too many people in our society do not know the meaning behind the term. You went out and did the research. All throughout the reading it was clear that you knew what you were talking about. I find it very impressive that you picked this kind of topic and did such a good job on explain everything there is to know about it. I specifically liked the approach you had towards your audience starting off your paper. Sometimes it can be hard approaching an audience about specific topics and issues. You do not want to start with your reader hesitating if he or she wants to continue reading your story. In many cases with topics like these you will get a lot of turn downs. Quotes and things of that sort help the reader realize that the writer is fair and goes of what has been previously said. A great example was when you used the quote, “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. The following sentence stated that this quote is one that is commonly used by many socialist. Just that quick explanation gave me a better understanding of what kind of a writer you are.
I noticed that the language and diction are both very storing in the writing. Some of the vocabulary that is used impressed me. Very good choice of word for the most parts of the situations. There was times that I was a little confused when it went from a very serious subject of terrorist bombing and nuclear warfare to, I think, sarcastically talking about blowing a whole city up. I find that to be a very serious issue because of the topic. Some people can be completely repelled to read the rest of the writing just because of that sarcasm. I myself am still not sure if that was sarcasm or actual talk. That was the last sentence before the paragraph ended which made it impossible to know which way it was intended. I just think that if there is in fact sarcasm in such serious debate that it should be further explained.
Overall the writing and research was very well conducted. It showed that you took your time and actually went into descriptive research of some of the selected topics. There were numerous terrorist examples that had a good amount of information about them but some could be furthermore explained. There were specifics terrorist acts and problems that I was very interested by that I wish had a little more detail. I think some of the topics should be more detailed. There were many different examples of terrorism that included many countries that could have been cut down. Instead of including all those examples of terrorism, maybe it would help if some of them just got more into detail.-
Lee McKinnis
Where could I expand upon more? ^the examples of terrorism?
Well dealing with the case of the cities, , the ” Anyone could be shot for some reason or an innocent blown up in a car bomb, or lose half their family because someone sets off a nuclear weapon in the city their family lives in. It pervades society and everyone, especially given that terrorism is a social issue that comes out of disenfranchisement from mainstream society due to policies of the state or the popular prejudices of people
oh that was seriously typed.
-
Tom Rybovic
Yes, more examples of certain kinds of terrorism.
-
-
-
Taylor Blattner
Hello LEE ! This was a hard paper for me to read.. not because you did a bad job or anything, but just because terrorism is something I am completely and 100% against, and even sometimes it is hard to read about. But off of that side note, I actually enjoyed reading your paper. It was informational and I can tell that you put a lot of thought into what you were researching. Before reading your paper I did not know that there are in fact, multiple types of terrorism in the world today. I just thought that there was one basic form. I thought that you had a good strong and powerful introduction to your paper, with good definitions and thought put into it. It opens up the paper for the rest of the information that is to come. I also like how throughout your whole entire paper you had a lot of history, which backed up what you were initially talking about in the first place. You went into great detail about terrorism. At times I felt that you were often repeating yourself on something that you previously stated. But I understand.. its hard to write a paper of such length in such a short amount of time.. I know I repeated myself many times throughout my paper. But oh well, what can we do. Fix it in the end if you would like but I overall thought that it was a good paper. “Terrorism is caused by social oppression, disconnected and marginalized individuals, and states not responsive to the will of the citizens.” Out of your whole paper I think that this is my favorite sentence that you wrote. I would say mostly because in just few words, a simple short sentence you summarized your whole paper on what terrorism actually is. And that is awesome. I like how close to the end of your paper you added in “support groups” or “organizations” as I would call them, that deal strictly with problems with terrorism. I also like how you added links to these pages, just in case people actually wanted to learn more information about them. It is also nice how you added a phone number that you can contact for multiple areas in the city of Chicago and throughout the state of Illinois. It is also nice how you added books that are written by people specifically to help you learn more about the problems with terrorism and how you can help fix the problem. While reading your paper I tried to think of some constructive criticism that I can give you, but when I got to the end of your paper I was only able to come up with one thing.. which I mentioned prior to this. You seemed to repeat yourself, but that is simple to fix! Other than that I thought your paper was great and it really caught my attention, especially for a topic that I am not a personal fan of. Keep up the good work Lee!
-
Holman Zea
Hello, Lee interesting essay about terrorism. You gave me something to think about. I never saw it as a good thing or the results of a bad government. When people are oppressed they will fight back. In my country there is a huge rebellion group that is terrorizing my country. People get kidnap for money, little boys are train to become “freedom fighters” this group of rebels persuasive the children to become loyal solders. I like the fact that you added history to your essay to show the positive things that rebels had done. There are a lot of innocent people who are caught between the bombs and the shooting. Our society always sees as terrorist blowing up stuck, killing people, kidnapping people for no reason. However there is always a reason for their actions. I do not agree with such terrible acts that this terrorist do in order to send a message. The government instead of trying to figure out the root of the problem the government sends solders to kill them. The issue with terrorist is that nobody will ever achieve happiness.
-
Lee McKinnis
What country are you from?
-
-
-
Lee McKinnis
In Chapter Two, the authors say to say things – and mean them. For many I guess it is hard to “break free” of tradition as the author says. There might also be a mental disconnect between how one writea and types with friends, or on forums, or on youtube comment fields and how one types in a formal academic setting, with no bleed over. There can be an advantage, some good things to that – after all in an academic paper you would not turn into a segue on “the faggots ruining everything” on a conversation on LGBT policies in modern life, or get into an argument over “socking a bitch out” when you are writing a paper on how many times in domestic violence females initiate fights against their partners vs the times a male initiated such violence, if there is a noticeable gap in females beginning domestic violence more than males. After all, for some people there will be a disconnect from discussing variables, numbers and controls abruptly to a 4chan-level advocation of battery of females. Now, if you have a conviction in here, it could be phrased better. I.e. Point out the surpsising or shocking manner of more females beginnign domestic violence against males, and mention that this is surprising to the author based off his past reasing and research, and that more is needed to look into that. “Ownership” of work I do not agree with as much, as posting as an anonymous individual on the internet or newspapers if fun too. Sure, there is no “ownership” of the work but that can be a good thing! Why do you want to risk political or social ostracism? A pro-pedophile debater saying child pornography is not inherently evil would be attacked by society, even if he has plenty of evidence. Moralists would try to kill him. How does he benefit from “owning” the work in that case. Society oppresses people. By being anonymous and not “owning” your work there is an advantage in things. And by being anonymous, your voice and articles can speak for several, or many people. You could be a different pro-pedo debater arguing with the same newspaper editorial/opinion writer than the LAST debater. But the points are the same, and no one knows who is who. That forces people to focus on the evidence and the text, not who says it. Not getting into arguments and “Wanks” about whether to listen to a perosn because of their history, rather than the pure information provided. Mindwandering and random writing is also useful, you mentally send out spokes and wheels and connections and associationes come out and connect. I remember some autistic people saying they write and think in a similar manner, with their mentally noting similarities and how they can be used. Another analogy which might be useful would be the hyperspace/hyperdrive/faster-than-light travel in many science fiction series, with hyperlanes or “phase lanes” connecting nodes, i.e. planets, stars, other bodies which generate gravity walls together allowing spaccraft to travel from place to place using the nodes which connect all. However, the “wild mind” sounds very furry-esque in my opinion. Going primal.Revisionism and killing good writing is annoying. Well “killing yoru darlings” is honestly one of the worst things, or at least the hardest things for me to do. But it can be sniped and used for later purposes as the authors mentioned.
DeVillez, Eric R, Michael McGuire, Thomas P. Dow, Troy A. Swanson. “Why White Rice? Thinking Through Writing”. Kendall Hunt. 2010. Print -
Lee McKinnis
1. I have been completing my draft work to a decent extent but I could have done more – certain things were reedited after posting for example
2. I am not sure how I can revise my plans for my papers – I have not received a lot of feedback. I will likely increase and explain certain locations of the paper though for any sort of revision
3. I did respond to many people, more than three but the length has varied – honestly I did not check the word counts to see how long they were but I did type to a lot of people. I am not sure how my responses were, but I do remember writing some advice as well as a general response to their papers
4. I did contribute to class and splatter journal entries, so I am not lacking in that area at least. I believe I have assisted others to some extent, but I am unsure as to how coherent it was
5. I am waiting for a check from my “job” at the debate tournament so I can buy the ‘why white rice’ book now, I was unaware that you were assigning readings until last week as it was not referenced.
6. I have not conferenced with the professor, but I did ask someone I knew from internet forums and one person from a chatroom who I talk to a lot their opinions of the paper I was typing.
7. Honestly, I cannot detect much as to what I learned. Note this is my second attempt to take this course, and for COM-101 it took me three times to get through the course.
8. This is my first self-assessment but it seems that I am slipping somehow at least in the past week, and have to deal with the “pamphlet” idea quickly and soon
9. I deserve a C
10. This is all!-
Jean Claud Sunga
you were suppose to print this out and give it to him
-
Lee McKinnis
I did I just posted it here as erm, a databank or pastebin
-
-
-
Lee McKinnis
Service and activism has many things in common and a lot of differences, engaging in service and/or activism is for assisting and improving the world – “for a better world” basically. The ethical guidelines on achieving a better world in general, on how to deal with this is not to do extreme things is simply put no excessive lying and manipulating people. Beyond this I did not write anymore for my notes.
Basically the only difference is the perception/connotation people have in their minds between those two words.
-
Lee McKinnis
Regarding “I am not a writer” there is accurate statements in there, correct. There is a sense of increasing one’s skills in writing, as there is both A. innate talent and B. adapting and training to “increasing” your skills. The “writing is not tidy” aspect is also true, I have several unorganized/loosely organized textfiles on my list which are used for writings and papers for alternate-history and science fiction universe organization, the timelines and histories and references or comparisons to the timelines and events in the world that we al currently exist in (whether it is “the real world” or not is unsure, given there is an unlimited amounts of timelines and histories if String Theory is correct). I guess there is a difference between “correct” and “good” writing, as a lot of posts on, say internet forums I post on are different than the posts in formal businesses and related formal writing. I can argue some of the posts on internet forums are better, as they are more direct, better writing. They may be written in LOLcat, chanspeak or even old-school 1337speak but they are “good” writings to use. There were some formal and academic books I remember reading on secessionism, where the papers were more annoying to “slog through” and to read in detail, due to their phrasing of some things which annoyed me unless I was in a mental case/status. Having others read your writing can be useful, but it can also be weird for them to read your writing. There is also some odd responses you will get from say posting on internet forums, like people “joking” about shooting you for one of your responses.
null DeVillez, Eric R, Michael McGuire, Thomas P. Dow, Troy A. Swanson. “Why White Rice? Thinking Through Writing”. Kendall Hunt. 2010. Print -
Lee McKinnis
Hessler’s Village Voice is…..a bit odd. But useful. After all, random privileged people can do things (Remember the person’s family is a bunch of rich doctors, with rich doctor friends). It was some sort of advantage. My thought was simply that people can do things but I am not sure how that affects me per se. I was interested in going to other countries, like say China or Japan – but they aren’t as rundown crapshacks as the regions of Nepal where he went to. That and that I don’t have as strong a connection in that case, a better analogy would be me going back to Mississippi and helping the other black people upgrade their schools or assist with a agriculture department volunteer program or something….. Also, harassing legislators heh. I think some people did that before. Social organizing and all that. The people in that story treat politics as a social game to be enjoyed rather than a duty to be done or something to be slogged. That may make it easier for some, but it will make it harder for others – it may annoy some people.
-Hessler, Peter. “A Reporter at Large, Village Voice, The Peace Corps’s Brightest Hope.” Online Book. The New Yorker. 2010. Last accessed February 7, 2012. pgs 101-109. splatter.writing101.net -
Lee McKinnis
For “Who will Survive” I will be honest and say yes I was pretty biased in my response. I was going to end up saving all the african-americans in the group first as I, the author/typist is african-american myself (someone else noticed that when I was saying ‘dont kill the little girl!’). As a member of a small nation, I would be biased to preserving the small nation – arguably at the expense of a larger nation – that can be sound logic. Large nations can withstand heavier casualties and survive. Smaller nations do not have that luxury before demographic collapse. Someone from a larger nation would naturally work to make sure that all nations have an equal percentage of their population killed, or be ‘magnanimous’ and ‘graciously’ have more of their population killed in a sort of fairness. This problem comes out/came out during the ‘Cold War’ when France and the UK pursued separate nuclear weapons programs, knowing that if war happened, would the US be willing to exchange, say Chicago for Birmingham (England)? To a lesser extent that has happened whenever people had treaties – “Do you want to Die for Danzig” being printed in the UK and France before European part of WWII began.
(More …) -
Lee McKinnis
Welll, this article is interesting. In this hypothetical future, apparently a bunch of “left-leaning peaceniks” take over the US and have enough influence to conduct a Soviet-style mass deportation of all Lobbyists to Greenland in some sort of Gulag-type program. My reaction is a bit, interesting. Imagine those people controlling a government. Five-year plans were enacted in order to convert the domestic US energy generation to renewable instead of burning dead plants and animals. It’s stated that it was begun in local and regional locations then spread to a progrma by the central government. After presumably gaining enough control over the US/North America they forge a “rapid-response” force under the auspices of the United Nations (I wonder how thew “new world order” conspiracy theorists aren’t tweaking out and rebelling against “government tyranny” and how they managed to keep control of so much of the US/NA, especially with things like a minimum wage implemented via UN treaties). They conduct a program to “Green up Cleveland” (Why don’t they green up a more sub/tropical environment like Atlanta – maybe it was to prevent a repeat of ‘Kudzu’ coming out to overrun everything). They condict verious other things (like destroying the DeBeers monopoly on diamonds). The billboards were destroyed, with “98% of the public” supporting such a bill. (More …)
-
Lee McKinnis
Asking what I am willing to live die…
Asking what I am willing to live, die and kill for is a bit interesting as a question. It’s also incriminating as all hell, and as such I will state this entire paragraph is hypothetical and not to be taken as plans or threats. Given this society’s behaviors this should be specified. Given I am writing this under my “real life” name and not posting on some forum behind seven proxies or whatever defensive measures, this should be specified. Now, I would have to think about this a little. Actually most of my answers I had already, but it is still useful to go into detail when being confronted qith the question as to what you consider your purpose for continuing to exist, and the reasons for removing the existence of (presumably) humans or having your existence ended. But it seems that the main reasons to kill and die will be due to political reasons, the reasons for organizing the world and society. I have noticeably less reasons to live. (More …)
-
Alex Velez
politially charged much?
in lee mckinnis’ interpretation of live? die? kill? he likes to shock the reader into seeing what his ideas are. He goes against the grain of what most people have written about and substitutes it with some very strong political thought and alternate universe type scenarios. I kind of like the scenario he puts himself in when asked what he would live for. I agree it would be pretty cool to be a spectator of the future and see whether or not your ideas or inventions are used and if so, to what degree, if not at all. He mentions some historical political figures as well as an inventor in this scenario. He also mentions, he would live for a couple of people so that they don’t commit suicide. This is where I got lost pretty much. It really seems to me that what he would kill for and die for are also reasons for living. He goes into great detail on killing for freedom, as well as dying for it too, but it also seems like it would have to be on his own terms. For instance, in his die and kill segment he says “I can die for freedom and fighting those who suppress freedom. Freedom is something that I do hold in high value, and I respect those who oppose threats to freedom.” But in his next paragraph he says “Can I become like them, fighting in mud, and shit, and glass, in blown-out cities and wrecked cities and country-side, risking life, limb, sanity and torture? Probably not”. So would you or wouldn’t you kill for freedom. I should also mention that in words in between where first quote and the second reiterate that as well. The rest of the paper throws more examples of different political regimes governments etc… Which seem more like fillers for the paper than actual thought? At this point of the paper I got a little confused as to what lee would die and kill for. it seems to me that he was just running scenarios in his head and was undecided in the end as far as what he would live, die, and kill for. dude, I spent 3 days reading this, I know I’m a little slow but I just had a hard time reading your paper with all of the examples that I just couldn’t understand because I’m not a “detailed history” person. So I could not relate without googling all of the people and factions you mention in your writing, which in the end you may perceive them in a different way than I do. So check it, next time think about warm fuzzy rabbits and rainbows for inspiration and see where it leads you.
I would also like to add that in no way did you mention “bomb” and “terrorist” in your writing like you claim in your last thought. Peer reviewing is a lot more difficult than writing my own stuff. So just know I put a lot of thought into this without sounding like a jerk. You have a lot of cool movie ideas but I think that all three questions still need answers.-
Lee McKinnis
Yeah, it was political charged a lot. I edited it more and ended up lengthening it more haha. And I just noticed that papers are longer when published here than when they’re online, perhaps due to the size of the computer I am typing on right now. The part of me asking if i can ‘really’ do such actions is pointing out there’s a difference between posting on a forum or typing on a blog and picking up an AK or M-16 haha. The government systems were supposed to be why they’re worth killing and dying for. Yeah part of this was me running scenarios, to explain my logic.
I did go into detailed history, so don’t blame yourself for that. Also lol, warm fuzzy rabbits and rainbows. Maybe I should’ve included “Watching anime” as a reason to live, because anime is awesome! Also, Nyan Cat!
-
-
-
Lee McKinnis
Ecologically literate means that you understand how ecosystems work, how ecosystems function and the aspects of them. I would not say ecologically literate means you are ‘in tune’ with your environment, or that you are good and preserve the earth’s environment in a well manner of do anything of that matter – just that it means that you know how the ecosystem, or environment of the planet Earth (or any other planets or heavenly bodies you happen to inhabit) functions. (More …)
-
Lee McKinnis
It’s like I’m posting on a forum, weeeeeee! Where’s the forum signatures though?!? Oh, this is more like a blog than a forum haha
Lee McKinnis is discussing. 
Alex Velez are discussing. 
Tom Rybovic, 
Holman Zea and 2 others are discussing. 
Jean Claud Sunga are discussing. 
Lee McKinnis 4:00 pm on April 11, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
this is a mirror!