[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: Flowing evidence....
On Mon, 4 Dec 1995 Pacedebate@aol.com wrote:
> Tuna has mentioned several times that he thinks it is important to flow
> evidence.
> I consider myself a tag line judge. I am not interested in what evidence says
> unless that evidence is indicted. I think that if a debater says 'Impact -
> nuclear war killing all of humanity' that it is irrelevant what the card
> below that claim says unless it is disputed by their oppossition. When I
> don't flow evidence I don't risk making an argument for one side by saying
> 'Your evidence doesn't meet the tag.' If evidence is disputed it doesn't
> matter if I flowed it I just call for the card.
Since the debaters have cross-ex and prep time to read the other
team's evidence on their own, is it therefore reasonable for debaters to
dispense with actually reading the cards in their speeches? They can
just give the taglines, and the debate will be much shorter.
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page