posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 06:38 AM
Xpert11 and I decided that six rounds of point and counterpoint would provide a sufficient "distance" to actually test our arguments. As a person
trained in oratory and debate, I am aware that shorter formats can mean that you don't have to work as hard to make your point. In the shorter
format, the person with the better wordsmithing skills has what amounts to an unfair advantage.
With this in mind, I have one suggestion. Suppose that we had beginner, experienced, and elite classes debate? Each could have a progessively more
rounds. Say, 2, 4, and 6.
As many already know, there are any number of tactics to be used in a debate. In this case, skill depends on your use of a keyboard. Tactics break
down to sly word compilations and cunning argumental constructions. We are essentially dealing with one's skill at written argument. More rounds
mean more room to maneuver for veterans. those who need to learn the craft can benefit from the shorter format.