I think that it would be worthwhile seeing what we can learn from the debating community.
Consider the article Flowsheet Logic and Notecard Logic. I suspect most of the things we would learn would be antipatterns, but it’s still useful to have negative examples (especially when those examples are widespread).
By Oxford-style do you mean British parliamentary (BP). In BP a) people speak at a rate that can actually be understood b) debating is about arguments having an impact, not just maximising the number of arguments.
Consider the article Flowsheet Logic and Notecard Logic. I suspect most of the things we would learn would be antipatterns, but it’s still useful to have negative examples (especially when those examples are widespread).
That’s American debating. American debating is weird.
Care to clarify the difference? Oxford-style debate isn’t any better in this regard. Is there some other form of debate that is?
By Oxford-style do you mean British parliamentary (BP). In BP a) people speak at a rate that can actually be understood b) debating is about arguments having an impact, not just maximising the number of arguments.