Friday, January 13, 2012

Fixing "Wrong" Formatting on Evidence

I have never actually enforced any specific requirements when it comes to my fellow debate clubmates submitting to me. And when I say they submit to me, I mean they send me files. They don't bow down me or anything. I'm new, that will come later. Anyway. Ah yes, files. Well, basically I don't ask anything special of the evidence and whatnot which is occasionally sent to me. That just means I get to go and fix all of their formatting "mistakes" myself.

Here's how it's done, people: The tag lines are bold and in 13 point Times New Roman. It does not have to be Times New Roman, but for the sake of tradition, it should be. Any formal font will do, but it must be a serif font to allow for ease of reading. The evidence must be in 12 point, normal type. Everything I need to read is underlined, anything I don't is not and is in 9 pt type. The author's name comes immediately below the tag line. If I read the credentials, they are underlined as well and must come before a parenthetical set of the name of the article I'm quoting as well as an italicized link to it, in that order, and, if possible, the name of the website, newspaper, or magazine and a specific date. I'll only be reading the month and year the evidence is from, because what matters is that it's from July 2010, not July 24th. No one cares. If I don't read the credentials, they are first in the parenthesis. I'm sorry, but this is all important to me. It's how I learned. Any thing else is just wrong.

We all have our preferences. We all have our rules. We all have our own requirements for the exact formatting of our 1ACs, disadvantages, and various other typed debate-y paper-y things. The reals nerds inside of us often go so far as to make sure any and all evidence that reaches our computer screens and pass through our printers are properly formatted according to our specificities. Otherwise, we'll be thrown off and the whole entire round will go awry. It's just better for everyone's sake that we fix wrong formatting.

What about you? Are you super strict too? What are your ground rules?

You're homeschooled, and you know how it's done.


  1. Hahahaha! I was actually just thinking about formatting rules today. This is so true, though. Most people stick to the way they were taught, and don't like other ways people do it.

    I won't list my ground rules, as they are extensive; but I am incredibly strict on 1) what is in my files, and 2) the way they are formatted.

  2. HAahaha I was supperrr nit picky about how my briefs were formatted. My ground rules were:

    Tag lines = 14 Times New Roman font, bolded. Entire citation italicized. Author, credentials to read, date, and source underlined. Actual card in quote marks, parts to read underlined and bolded, parts not to read = size 10 font. And everything else in size 12 Times New Roman.

    I changed alllll my citations to look like that. xD No matter what brief.