I don’t mind doing it, but I really loathe it (as an activity). In a best-case scenario, you see a well-structured debate where the teams pay attention and make reasonable, well-informed judgments about the resolution. In reality, large numbers of debaters are apathetic–either to the topic or to debate in general. Additionally, if one or more debaters do not take the debate seriously, it is a quick, sharp decline from a structured discussion to an episode from the peanut gallery.
Public Forum Debate (PFD, aka Ted Turner Debate), to put it bluntly, FUCKIN SUCKS! None of the speeches are long enough to really make any strong case. Sides (affirmative/positive) are decided by a coin flip, and cross-examination is replaced by “cross-fire.” This, to me, makes debate more of a fox news event. The choosing of sides is reminiscent of a football game, and crossfire is like one of those “fair and balanced” “no-spin” news shows on the fox network. I thought judging policy debate was the worst, i was wrong.
Judging LD debate makes me feel important, relevant, and smart. Judging PFD (which reminds me of personal floatation devices from boy scout camp) makes me feel irrelevant, inconsequential, and dumb. The only factors keeping me here are respect for Naylor and my wife, and the fact that i’m getting paid for this. And, I guess, the fact that i’m not the type of person to just walk out of a tough or unfulfilling situation. Generally, my philosophy includes the avoidance of these types of activities, but if i am unlucky or unwise enough to find myself in just such a situation, I’m going to stick it out because that’s why I’m here. I just wish for it to be over soon.
Recent Comments