Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The 1NR undoubtedly has the most preparation time of any speech given in the debate. It can often start prepping during the 2AC, and always has whatever prep time is taken for the 2NC, the 2NC, and the cross-examination of the 2NC to prepare (after cross-examining the 2AC). This amounts to a minimum of 11 minutes in high school and 12 minutes ...
Policy debaters' speed of delivery will vary from league to league and tournament to tournament. In more progressive and larger tournaments, debaters will speak very quickly - often called spreading - in order to read as much evidence and make as many arguments as possible within the time-constrained speech.
In policy debate, fiating the plan is almost always granted without argument, to help debaters and judges evaluate the merits of a plan as though the plan happens. From there, debate ensues, and it is valid to argue that the Affirmative plan is more expensive in dollars than the Negative counterplan, for example, where fiat is granted to both ...
In collegiate debate, computers may *not* be used in any round, however some high school tournaments and organizations misinform about their use. Those tournaments that follow the National Forensic League regulations may or may not allow laptops depending on the district. Debaters often prefer to use legal paper to be able to capture the ...
Grounds: Is the format, stock issue outline, or allowances within the debate round fair to both sides? Grounds is often argued by both sides that certain types of arguments unfairly overscope, overly limit, or overburdens one side's pool of arguments in favor of the other side.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us
"Sesame Street" has been gentrified. After 45 seasons, the brick walls that once fenced in the neighborhood have been razed, giving way to sweeping views of what looks suspiciously like the Brooklyn Bridge (it is in fact a composite of three New York City bridges).
Topicality is a resolution issue in policy debate which pertains to whether or not the plan affirms the resolution as worded. [1] To contest the topicality of the affirmative, the negative interprets a word or words in the resolution and argues that the affirmative does not meet that definition, that the interpretation is preferable, and that non-topicality should be a voting issue.