Re: Evidence and ethics

[Steven Hunt <hunt@lclark.edu>]

Debate evidence is read so rapidly in rounds with inadequate source 
citations that it is impossible for judges or opponents to really ck it 
out without asking for it. Is it part of debate as an oral activity to 
ask for evidence maybe lots of evidence to ck source cites context of 
evidence? Source cites and context can't even be cked in a given round at 
least not much maybe a few cards out of 50 or 60. What is to be done if, 
after the round, the sources are found to be of poor awful quality or out 
of context or contradictory to the thrust of what the author concludes? 
Must the debaters judge merely wait till next time?????

The standard has always been she/he who utilizes a card a piece of 
evidence in the debate sense is responsible for it. Is this still a good 
standard a reasonable standard in the time of Lexis Nexis, handbooks, 
squad brief and evidence files, Massive trading????????

Just a few thoughts to get some more concrete discussion on evidence 
standards going.
Steve Hunt

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: Evidence and ethics
• From: "Russell T. Church" <rchurch@frank.mtsu.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: neg positions...
• Next by Date: Anti-gay far right group (fwd)
• Prev by thread: neg positions...
• Next by thread: Re: Evidence and ethics
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page