From: tshuman@ccp.com
Date: Mon, 11 May 98 08:24:48 -0500
To: pgkst5@imap.pitt.edu
Subject: LD Judging Philosophy
Inasmuch as LD debate is not so convention-bound as CX (thank God),
there isn't much for me to say here. The following are the beliefs
which shape my perception of what takes place in an LD round....
1. There is no "right way" to "do" Lincoln/Douglas debate. Debaters
are free to argue for whichever model they prefer, but any claims
regarding what an opponent "must" do will be summarily dismissed.
2. Both debaters have an obligation to clash with their opponents'
arguments. Given the structure of LD debate, however, the
Negative debater is more responsible for ensuring clash than the
Affirmative: If there is *no* clash in the round, the Negative
debater will very likely lose.
3. Evidence can be helpful in supporting arguments. In almost no
instance will it be considered dispositive on an issue. This is
especially so regarding quotations from any of the Great
Philosophers LDers are so fond of citing. Please do not treat
quotations from such people as if they were trumps in a game
of cards.
4. I generally do not flow LD rounds. Please do not assume that
I am not paying attention, or that I will not be able to sort out
the contending arguments.
5. Incivility of any sort will be ruthlessly punished. Nuking your
speaks is only the *beginning* of my response to such behavior.
Play nice, or be prepared to deal with the consequences.
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and...well, not so tall
as I used to be,
Terrance Shuman
Bishop LeBlond Memorial High School
St. Joseph, Missouri
|
