Difference between revisions of "Disclosure Theory"

From Circuit Debater LD
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
(Added correct tournament name)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Disclosure theory is a subset of theory referring to practices of disclosure (sending cases before a given round). Disclosure practices often happen on the wiki (https://hsld.debatecoaches.org/) and has several components which will be discussed here:
== Overview ==
Disclosure theory is a shell read to critique one debater's disclosure practices. In recent years, it has become a common norm in the debate community to [[Introduction to Circuit Debate#Disclosure|disclose]], in part due to the prevalence of disclosure theory on the circuit. There are many different degrees to which debaters choose to disclose, but it is almost always done on the [https://hsld.debatecoaches.org HSLD wiki]. Below, we will highlight various methods of disclosure. Please note that these methods are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
=== Open-Source ===
Debaters upload a word document containing their constructive position to the wiki after the round ends. This word document should contain all of the highlighted tags and cards from these constructive speeches. Essentially, it should be the same as the speechdoc that you've emailed to your opponent and judge in-round. Disclosing responses made on case is optional. Common standards in a "must open-source" shell include helping small school debaters get access to evidence, helping educate younger debaters about what ideal cases look like, and improving in-round clash by providing better access to evidence.


# Open Source–this is where a word document of your 1AC/1NC are posted on your wiki page. Debaters make a claim that all documents must be open sourced so that debaters can read the evidence of other debaters (to check back against evidence ethics), help under resourced debaters by giving them a new resource, and ensuring better clash since debaters know what is being discussed in depth. Claims to the contrary include critical thinking and the value of thinking on one’s feet and ensuring small schools don’t get prepped out when their prep is on the wiki. Most judges believe that open source is a good thing.
Open-source is considered the norm in the debate community today, with most debaters choosing to do so. Note that even if you choose to open-source, it is also recommended to create an entry in the cite-box detailing what position you have ran that way it is easy for your opponents to see a summary of all the positions you have read.  
# Cite Box–the cite box gives a summary of every argument. It shows the tag of each card, the citation, and the first 3 + last 3 words from where the card was cut, labelled under a “cite.” For example, if a 1NC read a Hobbes NC, ICJ Counterplan, and a theory shell, each would go under a separate cite box. Cites on wiki often do not work, however, so many people don’t put it anymore.
=== Full-Text ===
# Round Reports–a little more frivolous, round reports give a summary of what happened in each round. Debaters often say this is important because it tells people your strategy to help them prep their 1nc accordingly, especially since small schools wouldn’t know if a debater goes for theory every round based on their aff whereas a big school is more likely to have a debater who debated that debater and can leak their strat.
Debaters copy and paste the full text of their speechdoc into the cites box on the wiki. As a result, none of the highlighting or formatting is disclosed – simply the full text of everything that has been read.  


To make a wiki, one should sign in with their tabroom account, add a new school, then add a new debater. The home page linked above has resources to aid with this.
Full-text, while once popular, is rarely followed in circuit LD today because people will read theory if you don't also choose to open-source. However, it is still acceptable to put the full-text of your speech into the cite box if you also open-source.
=== Cite Box ===
Debaters will disclose the tags of their cards, as well as the first and last three words of the cards themselves, into the cite box. However, the cite box can sometimes glitch when certain characters are pasted in, so many debaters will remark in their cite box that the "cites aren't working" and that their opponents should "see open-source."


Disclosure shells read by debaters include must open source, must disclose round reports, must disclose the aff 30 minutes before the round, new affs bad (when an aff has never been read before, it’s called a “new aff” and is often not disclosed), and must disclose the official tabroom name of a tournament on tabroom.
Disclosing both via open-source and also putting an entry in the cite box is probably the most ideal form of disclosure. If your cite box isn't working, at least include an entry with a note to check open-source.
=== Round Reports ===
Round reports give a summary about what was read during each speech in the round. Each time you create a disclosure entry, the wiki also gives you an option to create a "round-report." Although this shell is slightly more frivolous, some debaters will claim that debaters need to include round reports on all of their rounds to help teach younger debaters strategy.  


Disclosure theory is strategic because it gives debaters a free theory shell to read regardless of how fair their opponent’s strategy is. Generic responses to disclosure include critical thinking (thinking on feet), small schools (they’ll get prepped out), reasonability (against egregious shells), out of round violations bad (safety and verifiability), and regress (no brightline to how much disclosure is sufficient).
=== Correct Tournament Name ===
This is even more frivolous. Many names people use to refer to tournaments are not the name of the tournaments on tabroom. For example, the tournament that is often referred to as "Valley", on tabroom, is named "Mid America Cup". The shell claims that when inexperienced debaters look at someone's wiki, they'll want to sign up for the tournament. However, if the wiki entry does not have the correct tournament name, then novices will not see anything on tabroom, and not be able to sign up.  


An example of a disclosure shell can be found here:
== Example ==
 
[[:File:Disclosure-example.docx|File:Disclosure-example.docx]]
[[File:Disclosure-example.docx|thumb]]

Latest revision as of 00:03, 7 December 2022

Overview

Disclosure theory is a shell read to critique one debater's disclosure practices. In recent years, it has become a common norm in the debate community to disclose, in part due to the prevalence of disclosure theory on the circuit. There are many different degrees to which debaters choose to disclose, but it is almost always done on the HSLD wiki. Below, we will highlight various methods of disclosure. Please note that these methods are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Open-Source

Debaters upload a word document containing their constructive position to the wiki after the round ends. This word document should contain all of the highlighted tags and cards from these constructive speeches. Essentially, it should be the same as the speechdoc that you've emailed to your opponent and judge in-round. Disclosing responses made on case is optional. Common standards in a "must open-source" shell include helping small school debaters get access to evidence, helping educate younger debaters about what ideal cases look like, and improving in-round clash by providing better access to evidence.

Open-source is considered the norm in the debate community today, with most debaters choosing to do so. Note that even if you choose to open-source, it is also recommended to create an entry in the cite-box detailing what position you have ran that way it is easy for your opponents to see a summary of all the positions you have read.

Full-Text

Debaters copy and paste the full text of their speechdoc into the cites box on the wiki. As a result, none of the highlighting or formatting is disclosed – simply the full text of everything that has been read.

Full-text, while once popular, is rarely followed in circuit LD today because people will read theory if you don't also choose to open-source. However, it is still acceptable to put the full-text of your speech into the cite box if you also open-source.

Cite Box

Debaters will disclose the tags of their cards, as well as the first and last three words of the cards themselves, into the cite box. However, the cite box can sometimes glitch when certain characters are pasted in, so many debaters will remark in their cite box that the "cites aren't working" and that their opponents should "see open-source."

Disclosing both via open-source and also putting an entry in the cite box is probably the most ideal form of disclosure. If your cite box isn't working, at least include an entry with a note to check open-source.

Round Reports

Round reports give a summary about what was read during each speech in the round. Each time you create a disclosure entry, the wiki also gives you an option to create a "round-report." Although this shell is slightly more frivolous, some debaters will claim that debaters need to include round reports on all of their rounds to help teach younger debaters strategy.

Correct Tournament Name

This is even more frivolous. Many names people use to refer to tournaments are not the name of the tournaments on tabroom. For example, the tournament that is often referred to as "Valley", on tabroom, is named "Mid America Cup". The shell claims that when inexperienced debaters look at someone's wiki, they'll want to sign up for the tournament. However, if the wiki entry does not have the correct tournament name, then novices will not see anything on tabroom, and not be able to sign up.

Example

File:Disclosure-example.docx

Retrieved from "https://ld.circuitdebater.org/w/index.php?title=Disclosure_Theory&oldid=2382"