reply to post by schrodingers dog
No!
As much as I like to encourage fairness and discretion, such things end at the moment they start to infringe upon honest,
necessary
self-expression. I will be bold, and state that none of us here value our debate so much, that we would consider worries about their 'integrity' as
valid grounds for
anyone to feel inhibited in voicing anything that
needs voicing.
Let's not censor ourselves, in side-discussion, beyond our
individual decisions of fairness. There's should be no implied policy of
'no-comment'. I've seen members explicitly turn down offers of help and reference supply from others, during an ongoing debate, because they
didn't think it would be
right -- I think we're all able to regulate our own expression of 'fairness'.
And if we don't? Well, that's what the adversarial system is all about. Why hide from reality, behind needlessly-contrived regulation? The
complete rules of each debate are specified in the OP; members are free within the T&C;
that's what should be regarded as canon.
Great job by the way, I have to say that was an excelent debate and you did an awesome job. 
