(1) How has the additional one minute of Summary speech time affected Public Forum debates?
The quality of argumentation has become substantially better. It has allowed students to focus on weighing and fully explaining arguments, rather than speeding through blippy extensions. PF has become more accessible, students are now able to slow down in front of lay judges or local teams.
(2) How has the additional one minute of prep time affected Public Forum debates?
Students have the ability to check their opponents’ evidence more thoroughly. Additionally, hyper-technical debates have become fairer (theory/ks/very unique topical args require more prep to respond to).
(3) Have the revised evidence paraphrasing rules caused a substantial change in practice? If so, please describe the positive or negative change.
No, for them to make a real change they need to be enforced. Judges (especially new judges!) need to be educated about the rules on verbal cues and evidence ethics. Theory is extremely hard to run in front of parent judges, which is currently the only mechanism to check back against evidence abuse. A great way to do this could be having a universal “How to Judge a Public Forum Debate” packet at tournaments created by the NSDA. Additionally, for these rules to create stronger theory debates, they need to be clearer.
(4) Has the revised Grand Crossfire language caused a substantial change in practice? If so, please describe the positive or negative change.
No, it has made no change. Grand Cross should be replaced by required prep time for each team, similar to the rules in Extemp Debate.
(5) Are you in favor of the 3 min Summary rule being passed as the official PF event rules? (Yes/No)
(6) Are you in favor of the 3 min prep time rule being passed as the official PF event rules? (Yes/No)