Animal, I was right there with you ... if you check my debate, I believe there is no more than 10 sentences of quotes in each post. That is why I
left out a big portion of one of the better abduction files in my closing
I am fine with the no limit of characters which is capped off at 10,000 if I am not mistaken, included that you meet the posting prerequisite. If it
dropped down to 7500 or something, it wouldn't be the end of the world, and it would probably help the eyes and minds of the judges!
2 pictures per post is also fine, since I haven't used them, but I have seen them used in the past and can be helpful (especially if a debate is
member judged, some don't click and read links).
I think maybe an external quote limit of 50 sentences total instead of 10 per source, that way depending on the material, you can use what you need.
I also don't think I would use all of it most of the time as Animal stated.
I think the Socratic Questioning is a wonderful addition to the debate.
I find the number of references acceptable as well.
The 24 hour limit keeps it moving decent, but, I could see how a 36-48 hour window might be better for some.
Maybe a possibility of roll-over for some of the limits. If you don't use any pictures in your first two responses, you can put 6 in the final
response before the closing. If you passed on references you can do the same ... or use them up early.
Well, I guess that would be more of a round limit per debater for certain items, and would require more strategy ... or it may be just too much
hassle for the judges/TheVagabond to keep track of round totals instead of post totals. Don't need to make that job any harder than it is.
Organizing a tournament and verifying everyone is following the rules is hard enough, without having to make it more complicated as this would most
Just trying to bounce some things off the top of my head. I am very eager to hear what others say on this. It would be nice for us to put our heads
together and get a set of rules we all agree to and hopefully enjoy; making the debates even more fun than they already are ... and keeping the
workload down for the organizer.
I mean overall, I quite like the setup ... it keeps things from being too much or too little, the pace acceptable, and not an information overload
for readers. There is just enough to state your argument, back it up, defend, debate, and take down your opponent's argument if you play it right.