Liles,+Gerald

I believe that debate is a heuristic device, i.e., a way to discover something. In this case, the something being discovered is the most powerful arguments for and against a given idea, NOT how to confuse or throw off another person. That said, clarity and clash are what I am looking for in every round. Do the debaters know their cases well enough to focus on their opponent's ideas?

I do not like spreading--the vast majority of judges and opponents will not be able to engage in legitimate debate when it is used. It is more information, less absorption.

The more conversational and philosophically sound debater will get my vote every time.