by Harrison Durland | Sep 9, 2019 | For Alumni, Judging/Judges, Soapbox, Team Policy
In the previous article in this series, I broadly described hybrid and purist judging approaches, but I didn’t dive into comparing the approaches’ pros and cons. Thus, I will devote this article to outlining some of the main arguments I see for and against each...
by Harrison Durland | Jan 16, 2019 | Soapbox
Imagine if legislation were made by policy debaters. I recognize that some readers may be imagining a dystopian world where almost nothing gets done due to a paranoid fear of starting a nuclear war, and even I realize that a congress composed of policy debaters could...
by Anna Johansen | May 9, 2018 | Team Policy
The saga continues. We now turn to NCFCA’s proposed debate resolutions for the 2018-2019 season. A. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially reform its policy toward one or more of the countries in the Economic Community of West African...
by Noah Farley | Dec 27, 2017 | Uncategorized
In my last post, I talked about the different types of burden scopes for different resolutions. In this post, I intend to address how to identify the different burden scopes you see in debate resolutions. Let’s look at three examples. Policy Resolutions I touched on...
by Noah Farley | Dec 2, 2017 | Parliamentary
Burdens. Love them or hate them, you can’t escape them. Whether it’s a Negative team arguing you don’t have enough evidence or an Affirmative team arguing that the resolution only requires one successful application, debate of all forms is filled with arguments...
