Debate Spreading

[hjkentproductions]

rap for nerds. lol.

[PookySC]

@mduplessis94 Policy debate is a competitive event, there is a real clash of ideas. Whether or not the general populace can understand it is beside the point. If everyone could do policy debate then it wouldn't be very competitive, now would it.

[Manastacio8]

0:30 "Use the fricking UN" ??? Really, you would say that in a debate round. Wow.

[scoutGOW]

LD debate! Screw policy. I'm not flowing this BS.

[snowmando1]

@scoutGOW LD debate at TOC most people spread.....

[scoutGOW]

@snowmando1 I dont see how spreading truly helps with anything other than annoying everyone around you. Its not good speaking and its just a pain in the but to flow. Its a shame spreading is working its way to LD. Correct if im wrong but i thought the hole point of ld was to have a more abstract debate that anyone could sit and understand.

[snowmando1]

@scoutGOW well I did ld for a year before moving to policy. While I was in ld, everyone ran just really standard things and the only difference between a policy and ld aff was that ld has value and criterion. The value and criterion in policy would be called framework. So both ld and policy contain the abstract world. Also spreading like many other people said like it allows for more arguments on the flow.

[scoutGOW]

@snowmando1

I have never debated policy to be honest. I kind of know how it works and i like the Idea, but spreading has completely turned me off from it. What i like about it is actually presenting a plan, so your not just debating a resolution but solving it.

[snowmando1]

@scoutGOW yah. I understand what you mean, because that was my initial thought when I first saw a policy debate round. But like as I started doing a little bit of policy, I liked it a lot. After about 10 rounds of like 450 wpm, I think I got used to it and it didnt really feel out of the ordinary. Also LD truthfully required not much evidence. The only thing I had for LD rounds was my aff and a few neg strats. I had no answers preppred out for either aff or the neg.

[snowmando1]

@scoutGOW The more arguments encourages more of a research burden, but I see that as a good thing, more research = more education. As you can tell, I'm not the type that likes rhetoric in speeches.

[105craft]

wow this isn't even that fast :P

[TravisRice66]

@Mduplessis94

ZOMG SOOOOO TRUE RIGHT

It's soooo ignorant right????

[V61Sunda]

@mduplessis94 I don't agree. The reason for spreading is to introduce more arguments in the same amount of time, however the structure of the arguments and the layout of debate has not been adulterated through the prevalence of spreading. If you pay attention, the arguments are laid out in a coherent format.

[mduplessis94]

@V61Sunda but even if you have more knowledge of the topic they could simply spread and make it impossible for you to win. Policy debate no longer values knowledge, it values speed.

[V61Sunda]

@mduplessis94 Slow teams have won the TOC, NFL, and the IPC. Spreading is a tool, not a necessity. That's where a lot of people get confused.

[damattster007]

@V61Sunda

I've got two TOC bids and my partner and I are slow as balls.

[snowmando1]

@mduplessis94 That isnt true. Even if the opponent team completeley spreads you out, if you have good coherent arguments , you can definitely win the round. Like my last round this weekend, a team completely spreaded us out going like 450-470 wpm (25 page 1AC), but we still beat them because we had a K we knew and we were well-prepped on.

[jo90114]

@mduplessis94 that's not at true at all, there is no basis to that claim. It actually promotes clash in a policy debate, because there are more arguments to answer...

[drinkmouse]

"Ambiguous question????"

If there is ANY problem with the original way the policy stands then the person arguing the pro policy change side should always win.

The problem lies in the solution unless the original solution is the best way it could possibly work. That's what should be discussed, the solution to the problem. This is a waste of valuable time. All you are doing is guessing.

[drinkmouse]

A child asking "why?" perpetually is a better debater than any of you.

[drinkmouse]

Unless the point is to become better manipulators of the truth? Is that what its about?

[drinkmouse]

To make truly good debaters the topic of policy debate should be: "Is policy debate useful?"

This will show you how wrong and stupid this whole idea is, and will make you much better debaters in the process.

[drinkmouse]

Irony: You people are so deluded that you will never understand what I'm trying to say.

[drinkmouse]

Policy debate is a perfect example of the concept of quality over quantity. You think that by speeding up the process by incorporating stupid time limits that it makes you better? Its like practicing an art form not by learning the absolute basics first. You may be able to make art, but the technical aspects will suck.

You shouldn't run before you're even able to crawl, let alone stand up. This horrible practice is turning people into manipulative idiots.

[tinamou62]

@drinkmouse i guess you don't like policy debate? no need to troll....

and by the way, there is quality in fast debate. but we take it up a notch and incorporate BOTH quality AND quantity. The number of arguments we get in is increased 3 fold from normal speaking speed, allowing for better coverage of the topic. And how are the time limits "stupid"? without them, rounds could go on infinitely....

You say, "That's what should be discussed, the solution to the problem" but that's what policy

[tinamou62]

@tinamou62 is about... policy is about taking a resolution, and arguing about the solution proposed to the resolution (AKA the plan).

You clearly don't know anything about policy debate. The fact is, spreading is simply fast debate. it's not stupid, or brainless. In fact, I would say it is much harder to spread than to slow debate (I've done both) because you have to come up with many more answers to arguments and analytics on the spot...So it is a worthwhile debate.

Please, stop trolling.

[TheSillybookworm]

This sort of misrepresents spreading in policy debate. This clip shows only a couple seconds of each spread, giving the viewer no time to assimilate the speaker's speech pattern, which ends up making a lot of people think that spreading makes your speech sound like gibberish.

[OLDGREGG9000]

I lost you when you started to quote Hellen Keller... "HUMINAHUMPHAGUMPAGAGUGUMPUGHM­APULARGHDURKAPUDDRERRR"

[Llamster]

Saying that spreading detracts from the ability to speak slowly and persuasively is like saying that running detracts from the ability to walk.

[BruinFilm13]

denzel washington doesn't need to spreed read to get his point across

[arielsei]

I miss policy debate!

[IskurBlast]

I don’t understand how this got to this point. You don’t see it in the rest of the world. It is a product of American inbreeding. If the judges would simply penalize them for not speaking coherently properly there wouldn't be an issue here. Its just that American teachers are too cowardly to tell a student that they are wrong so this has become standard practice.

[sculver10]

@IskurBlast This is incredibly false. The majority of speed rounds are in front of judges who get it. dumb teams who spread in front of lay judges get penalized, and thus learn. just because you don't understand the competitive nature of policy debate doesn't mean you ought to bash it.

[TheRealChrisAllen]

@IskurBlast It is coherent, you're just too dumb to understand it.

[IskurBlast]

@TheRealChrisAllen

I understand that the person is saying genius. What I don’t understand is how American judges let spreading take off as it did. You don’t see this in the rest of the world. The judges would never stand for it. Content is important but so is quality of delivery. In real argument the whole concept of spreading fails. You don’t make as many arguments as you can because that just opens you up to attack. Tear down one tear down all. It may be a fallacy but its the truth.

[mydogdaisy1212]

@IskurBlast The judges do penalize you for not speaking coherently, so there apparently there is no issue here. Listen if you can't understand the fast speaking it doesn't mean others can't. I could understand what most of them were saying and if you cannot just stay out of the activity, don't bash it. Every activity has a unique skill set, policy has evidence gathering, logic, flowing, and yes speed reading. Teachers don't manage policy debate also, just FYI.

[linksys0212]

the first guy SAm iola was spreading the dillion 99 card (ZPH)... it shouldn't take more then 910 second ti cover a card if you spread

[Filipinachick7486]

this isnt even hard to understnad

[miche1617]

Honestly, how does spreading help anyone in real life? Not in court rooms, not in public speaking...I understand it's a strategy to cram in info (and to undermine the opponent) but it seems like a bastardization of the intent of true debate. And it's annoying to those of us who want to see a legitimate debate.

[KabaneTheChristian]

@miche1617

Policy debate is an art form, not a "true debate over policy." Spreading increases memory capability.

[bluebirch114]

Reasons I'm glad I'm only in indian debate... there is no spreading here... also, I'm an LD-er... and I'm glad... policy scares me...

[KabaneTheChristian]

@bluebirch114

LOL LD.

[xXSpudmeister94Xx]

Sorry, could you repeat that?

[BreakerdeGodot]

The first one is not even all that fast for a spreader.

[iluvlulu1221]

@BreakerdeGodot well the first one cleared at the TOC...

[ilyLaura1]

my school would RAPE all of you in debate. just absolutely rape you. including me. btw, this is some shitty spreading. Want my school name? just ask.

[animelover654]

@ilyLaura1 Okay then. What's your school name? Oh, and if you and I were in a real round, I probably would've pulled a rape K on you. Just sayin' :D

[ilyLaura1]

@animelover654 haha, strake jesuit college preparatory, in houston, tx. look up our current bid count. we only do LD btw, not policy. so yea..and we're leading the nation in TOC bid count right now. and haha, i bet you wouldve! :p waht school you go to?

[Ehamber]

I hate spreading that isn't clean. Most judges hate it too. People need to learn how to spread the right way, coherently.

[friendlyfool232]

I watched a round, the other day, and one of the judges was a kid in this round!

[jjpangify]

I watched this one debate where the spreaders sounded so gay with their breath intakes

[Bob226226226]

I do pf varsity and I vs some spreaders and judges hate them and don't understand them so we usually get the win unless the judge was a past spreader. But do understand that there is a difference from talking fast and spreading. Talking fast is something we do we do have a time limit don't we

[mak3myda3]

Spreading sucks if your judge cant follow

[pasco161]

good job all of you, stop the double breath though

[StraightGruesome]

i hate spreading! 

[tehnikhil]

Sam Iola so friggin clear in this video.

[TheZack858]

you are not topical and what are your inharent barriers

[xenolalia]

I don't care how many arguments "spreading" allows one to cram into five minutes. In the real world, people are in fact limited by time and by their audience's aural abilities. Debate is and will always be an exercise in communication; spreading is the antithesis of communication. For better or for worse, very few people know how to spread or are capable of understanding such highly compressed speech. It is sad that policy debate rewards this kind of speech.

[TheZack858]

@xenolalia um one all the constructive speaches are 8 min not 5 those are the rebuttles and two debate does reward because its a specail skill that yes very few people poses but the fact is most debaters can understand just because your to dumb to under stand doesnt me the rest are

[xenolalia]

@TheZack858 I assure you that my difficulty in understanding "spreaded" speech is not due to my "dumbness". But it seems you missed my point. Sure, reading something blisteringly fast is a 'special skill'; so is threading a churro through your ears. That doesn't make it useful or worthy of "reward". And it seems especially ironic considering that debate is supposed to be about communication and building cogent arguments.

[franklintheturtle455]

I love this movie but every time that blonde chick shouts "SOVEREIGN POWER!" I really want to punch her in the face.

[MarshunMartin]

Of course spreading looks bad when the video switches rapidly between 10-second segments without context. The problem is not that speed makes policy debate useless, but that American culture is trained to learn from over-simplified soundbites and to put no effort into understanding complex issues. Anyone without deteriorating hearing can quickly learn to understand a fast debate round like the ones in this video. Those unwilling to learn this skill do themselves a disservice.

[MASTERCON12]

@MarshunMartin That comment wasn't smug at all.

[Ninkuria]

Oh policy, how I miss you.

I did policy for two years then switched to pofo for a tournament and then got in trouble for "spreading" during my speech. Sure I talked slightly fast but I definitely wasn't spreading. A normal person could still understand what I was saying. :< stupid judges (and yes it's always the judge's fault)

[blinggirl963]

ughhh.,... spreading sucks.. 

[camreeno360]

It amazes me how people don't realize that talking that fast is not only useless in real life, but the fact that no one other than debaters can understand them. So it defeats the purpose of debating. It seems like competitive debate is just about talking the fastest instead of focusing primaliry on substance. I doubt these kids even care about what they're debating about, rather they're just debating for the sake of debating... They're totally disconnected with the original purpose of debating..

[qwertyqazol]

@camreeno360 Well in this case, their purpose for debating is more to have fun and for intellectual stimulation than to "communicate."

[HCLcoasters]

@camreeno360 debaters understand what they're debating and the ability to spread enables them to fit more arguments into each speech. The debates never come down to who can spread the fastest but they are determined by the quality of the arguments.

[camreeno360]

@HCLcoasters Sure but I'm saying the whole drive to spread detracts from the debate. It turns it into this noisefest where the focus is taken away from what is debated. And it isn't really genuine debate, as competitors are asked to take opposing stnaces on issues that they themselves might not believe - therefore many of their arguments are just there to sound cogent and convincing in order to win. So little is actually accomplished.

[HCLcoasters]

@camreeno360 Once spreading becomes natural the debaters forget about it. In the one hour of debate provided by the rules the discourse can be expanded on much more by spreading. In reality there aren't two immutable sides that you must take in debate, the affirmative can craft many different arguments in their first time block and the negative can create many social critiques in theirs which leads to a deeper discussion of life or philosophy. CX debate judging is more complex then most imagine.

[Aika24]

@camreeno360 exactly.

[nazbites]

I don't like those breathes, they annoy me.

[MrJudL]

And how is this a speaking event at all? Debate is a persuasive exercise, not a contest of how fast one can run one's arguments past their opponent. I rather see a cogent debate where two people actually argue their cases than a debate where the wins are on techicalities like dropped arguments.

[auraofadancer]

wow. so fast. wow. i didnt get anything. their brains must work so fast

[davidssabb94]

This is why I stick with Congress or LD, I could never make my points clear while talking so fast and certainly would never be able to track the opposing team's arguments.

[SamGustavson]

the 1st guy is Sam Iola!

[supermaninhevin]

Yay for high school policy debate!

[jjforjt]

I hate the ones that yell, and mess up a lot, like blondy in this video

[someonesomewhere2112]

Ive seen faster on my school'd varsity debate team.

I think the movie is toning it down on purpose.

Plus, I do debate to do it myself. Watching a movie on it... no.

[zombierobopirate]

too bad the sound quality is so terrible that it just sounds like feedback

[rjmgambit]

Spreading transforms debate from a medium of discourse to an exercise in mechanics. It can only be followed by those familiar with the technique, and more often than not those are the individuals who will be influenced by the argument the least. It's an interesting but ultimately destructive practice to the art of debating.

[ds198]

It is interesting to watch but I don't see why it makes any sense to use spreading in debate. It's impossible to hear all of their arguments, and even if you could, to follow along with them. They could be saying anything.

[DoubleReturns]

It's hard to follow along, but later with a trained ear, you can actually see that they're making coherent arguments. Spreading is to get as many arguments and evidence out in the time you have. We generally don't spread in lay rounds because if you're not experienced, you can't understand spreading.

[rockrgirl01]

God, they are fantastic. I do LD, partially becasue I do not have this skill. Spreading in a lay round would be funny.

[demonking07024]

yea i can see where your comging from but in policy debate you only spread the body text or the actual evidence itself. the actual part one listens to is the tag or teh one sentece summary that is read slowly and emphatically

[ChristianTarsney]

It's 100% possible--most of the people in this video aren't even talking that fast. The human brain can comprehend speech at up to 700-800 words per minute, which no one in debate has ever come all that close to touching.

[fastfuriousfingers]

debaters can understand

but you're right it has no practical value because the general public doesn't speak at 500 wpm.

[Funkdoggxclusive]

isn't spreading reading cards?

this is like all rebuttle speeches

[Hermionedean]

Spreading can be in rebuttles as well.

Its really more over the act of speaking quickly.

I find it very impressive when people spread analytical arguments.

[thesupersurfer]

*rebuttals

[rightwingliberal1]

If you don't learn to effectively communicate your arguments to the average person, what good is debate?

[pattywagoneb]

you spelled douche wrong

[rockrgirl01]

@pattywagoneb Thank you for correcting that. I am guilty of typos.

[Chrisusaneve]

Nice spreading I can't even spread like that. Your mouth was speaking but appeared to be lagging

[cesarconsejero]

I hope spreading never arrives to Latin America, such a sad technique.

[EebstertheGreat]

I'm a bit miffed by the 2AR at the beginning. Why can't you vote on impact turns when the neg drops framework? I mean, if they actually turn the impacts, they'll win in any framework.

That said, anybody who concedes a no value to life arg deserves to get dropped.

[macintologist04]

I don't understand anything those idiots are paying

[newgarda]

spreading is ruining ld

[SunlandicTwin]

Cry more please.

Go do parli.

[HackNike]

spreading has ruined cx policy debate...