Argues that substantive rules of debate, instituted by the National Debate Tournament Committee, are both ineffective and counterproductive. Critiques the rule restricting evidence reading after a debate and the rule requiring judges to compare definitions when evaluating topicality arguments. Concludes that substantive rules should be rescinded…

Notes that the traditional conception of the debate resolution is held responsible for decreasing participation in academic debate, declining quality of argumentation, and the frustrating proliferation of "squirrel" cases. Discusses alternatives. Contends that reasonability continues to be the best standard for evaluating topicality…