General+Debate+Guidelines

=General Debate Guidelines= toc

A. -- A decision is not to be based upon:

 * 1) //The merits of the question//. The judge should not be influenced by prejudices in favor or against the proposition.
 * 2) //Partiality//. The judge should not be influenced by the reputation of, or partiality for or against, either of the competing teams, their schools, or coaches.
 * 3) //Preconceived notions on arguments//. The judge should not allow his idea of what the best affirmative or negative arguments or cases may be to influence the decision.
 * 4) //Personal preferences on debating style//. A judge should not penalize a team if its style, either in case construction or delivery, differs from that which s/he personally prefers; but should evaluate all styles on the basis of effectiveness in winning conviction.

B. -- A decision should be based upon:

 * 1) //Skill in analysis//. This includes not only the analysis of the proposition, but also analysis of the debate as it progresses.
 * 2) //Use of evidence//. This includes the use of sufficient evidence and proper reference to source.
 * 3) //Validity of argument//. This includes reasoning and conclusions drawn from the evidence presented.
 * 4) //Clarity of organization//. This includes clear outlining of constructive arguments and easily followed handling of refutation.
 * 5) //Effectiveness of delivery//. This includes all matters pertaining to oral presentation with special emphasis upon extempore abilities.

C. -- A team should be penalized for:

 * 1) //An unfair interpretation//. If the interpretation is disputed by the negative, it shall rest with the judge whether or not the affirmative is supporting a tenable position.
 * 2) //Discourtesy toward opponents//. Discourtesy should be penalized according to the seriousness of the offense.
 * 3) //Falsification of evidence//. If a team falsifies evidence in support of a point, it shall lose the point, and if the falsification is obviously deliberate, the judge shall impose an additional penalty according to the seriousness of the falsification.
 * 4) //Misconstruing an opponent's arguments//. A speaker who misconstrues and argument unintentionally should not be penalized more than the time wasted. If it is intentional, the team should in addition, forfeit the argument.
 * 5) //Introducing new arguments into rebuttal//. The judges shall disregard new arguments introduced in rebuttal. This does not include the introduction of new evidence in support of points already advanced or the answering of arguments introduced by opponents.
 * 6) //Speaking overtime//. When a speaker's time is up, the judge shall disregard anything beyond a closing statement.

D. -- There is general agreement among debate coaches on:

 * 1) //Interpretation//.  Judges should regard no interpretation of the question as official, unless the National Wording Committee issues an official interpretation and labels it as such.
 * 2) //Technicalities//. The team shall debate the basic principles underlying the proposition. Too much emphasis should not be placed upon a technicality.
 * 3) //Burden of proof//. A debate team need not destroy all opposing argument. It need only show that the preponderance of argument and evidence rests on its side.
 * 4) //Affirmative burden//. An affirmative team need not destroy all negative argument. It need only show that the preponderance of argument and evidence rests on its side. This holds true equally for the negative team.
 * 5) //Questions//. A team need answer questions only when they are shown to be pertinent and consequential to the debate.
 * 6) //Irrelevant arguments//. Arguments as to whether the proposition is constitutional, or whether it will be adopted are irrelevant.
 * 7) //Direct Clash//. The negative team is primarily responsible for a direct clash, providing the affirmative team is not evading the proposition. The affirmative team is responsible for a clash on arguments advanced by the negative as evils in the proposition.
 * 8) //Delayed replies//. An argument introduced in constructive cases should be replied to by the opponents in time to give the team which advanced the argument an opportunity to reply.
 * 9) //Adaptation//. A high premium should be placed upon adaptive extempore debating. This should not excuse a team for lack of clarity in organization or for errors in the use of English.
 * 10) //Persuasion//. A premium should be placed upon the ability of the debaters to utilize human interest and accepted premises. Fallacies committed in an attempt to gain persuasive power should be treated the same as other fallacies.
 * 11) //Fallacies//. A judge should not discredit an argument as fallacious, unless the fallacy is exposed by the opposition, except in the closing affirmative rebuttal, when the judge shall discredit it upon discovering the fallacy.
 * 12) //Constructive solution//. Credit should be given to the team which most nearly approximates a constructive solution to the problems.
 * 13) //Point of order//. The negative team shall not be denied the right to rise to a point of order after the closing affirmative rebuttal. However, if they argue the point instead of stating the point, they shall be heavily penalized on the point. In this contingency, final disposition of the matter shall rest entirely with the judge. In general, this practice is to be discouraged.