(1) How has the additional one minute of Summary speech time affected Public Forum debates?
Most of the rounds I have judged have not actually summarized with the extra time; instead they are using it to create further/ new arguments and as a result are misusing it. There needs to be clearer emphasis on the purpose of this speech if the extra time continues.
(2) How has the additional one minute of prep time affected Public Forum debates?
It seems to be abused for the purpose of getting evidence cards from the other team for future debates rather than actual prep. Teams are asking to see cards but then do not address those cards in their arguments in the rest of the debate. If used for actual prep it has been useful for teams that know what they are doing and need it. Most do NOT seem to need it overall.
(3) Have the revised evidence paraphrasing rules caused a substantial change in practice? If so, please describe the positive or negative change.
Not a substantial change from what I can tell. It seems important to keep so as not to misrepresent evidence – especially for lay judges. Of course one can “cherry pick” quotes and that could still go undetected if not called out by the other team.
(4) Has the revised Grand Crossfire language caused a substantial change in practice? If so, please describe the positive or negative change.
I think it has helped and led to “substantial change.” I saw more varsity teams trying to be respectful of their opponents and it made it clearer as a judge at times when one team dominated and spoke over the other team. It helps to maintain the integrity of public forum. It is still reliant on coaches and judges understanding the format and enforcing the intent with which public forum was created.
(5) Are you in favor of the 3 min Summary rule being passed as the official PF event rules? (Yes/No) YES
(6) Are you in favor of the 3 min prep time rule being passed as the official PF event rules? (Yes/No) NO
PS – I agree with the comment about eliminating the coin flip for preliminary rounds. Teams are able to make it through an entire tournament without debating both sides of case and thus do not truly reflect their skill. Some topics have an easier time or bias toward debating one side over the other. All teams should have to debate both sides equally before out-rounds.