Debate protocol: last-round new argument

No DebatArt policy prohibits last-round new argument, but the practice is flawed, particularly for the debate initiator, whether Pro or Con. For the initiator, leaving new argument until the last round is self-limiting, not advantageous, because, while the opponent can still rebut that last-round new argument in their last round, the initiator has no remaining round to defend their last round new argument. One constant is that initiators always have the top frame of each round.

This condition has been attempted to be rectified by calling waived rounds, but that practice is flawed as well, not to mention prohibited, since Policy dictates there shall be argument [including rebuttal and defense] in all rounds designated by the initiator. It has the further imprimatur of cowardice by the initiator by not rendering the first argument in the first round, preferring to see the opponent's argument first. If we initiate a debate, we ought to take the first crack at argument and stop playing waiver games.

We have the opportunity in Description of all debates we initiate to define rules of the road. These are not binding, so say Mods, but, as voters, we can choose to abide by them or ignore them, making it a risk for either opponent to break initiator-defined rules. I have attempted this, myself, and was willing to accept consequences. One rule should always be: No new arguments in the last round, whether or not it becomes policy.

I always use this rule for debates I initiate and often exploit failures to make this rule in debates initiated by others.  I would have no objection to such a policy although if we are honest, most debaters frequently violate the standard unintentionally.  As you are collating arguments for conclusion, new perspectives frequently surface even if we don't format them as arguments.

it's important to make a distinction between expounding on new perspectives surrounding an existing point of contention and the left-field introduction of a new point of contention entirely. 

If I provide another example on an existing point made in the previous round on the final round, would that be violating the rules?

Since there is no standing rule of DebateArt for final-round argument, it would be up to the initiator to impose in a debate challenge, your suggestion included or not.

I agree with MisterChris and oromagi, in principle, however...

For example, in your 4th round of our debate on the stopped clock, you offered an example of a previous round's argument concerning time zones by the "cars should have suspensions" paragraph. Since you argued time zones in previous rounds, I did not consider the cars example as a violation of my personal rule of no new argument in the last round. Ignoring my rebuttal of the time zone argument in the first place [for all reasons I noted] I had no problem with the cars example.

However, as you well know, you imposed no such last round argument prohibition. Even so, I think it is not fair play to offer a last round new argument, particularly for the initiator's opponent [me, in that case], because that player is always going to have the last word, and I don't think the last word should be an argument to which the initiator cannot respond.

Good debate, by the way. I really enjoyed it, and am glad you proposed it.

I don't debate much, but what MisterChris said is true. You have to make sure you have a clear difference and you also have to make sure that your opponent is aware of this rule as well

Probably not, although it may vary by case. If it seems unfair, it probably is.

On line, remote, fun debating.

 

To be addressed responsibly

But not to be taken too seriously

More important things to consider, elsewhere.

All that is required is

Good conduct

No whinging.