[eDebate] 5 point font
Thu May 14 12:49:52 CDT 2009
The truly most absurd practice is 4 point fonting two paragraphs except for
TWO WORDS jumping to another para or even page with all but TWO WORDS in 4
point font and then a concluding two or three words....as if somehow that
makes it a) an actual sentence and b) possible to look to see if the 7 or 8
randomly chosen words actually do fit together in the context of the rest of
Seriously, I have gotten cites where it was an entire article...and out of
that article, one long sentence was cherry picked from the whole
article......And then the rest is illegible because of small font.
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Richard A. Garner
<richardgarner at gmail.com>wrote:
> More moderate Russell/Kade:
> 1. In paragraph with underlined evidence: standard 8pt, minimum 6pt.
> 2. In paragraph without underlining: better small than not there at all.
> I also think that this might be an age/ability issue. I have no problem
> reading 4pt font ... if I need to, and thus would prefer that to nothing.
> Debaters should be prepared to accommodate those who have trouble reading
> smaller fonts.
> I also wouldn't call it cheating, unless debaters were doing it
> intentionally to make their cards look better at first glance. I haven't
> come across too much of that, i.e., font reduction inconsistent with rest of
> cards, etc.
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Jason Russell <jasonlrussell1 at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>> I'm with Kade. This is a functional ellipses. I came very close to adding
>> to my philosophy last year that I would simply disregard any evidence using
>> this tactic. It saves almost no space over 8-9 and intentionally obscures
>> context. Stop cheating.
>> eDebate mailing list
>> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman