Frameworks

Frameworks are somewhat like weighing. They are plans that are set to determine how the round should be judged. For example, if you ran a racism framework, you would argue that the round should be judged based on racism, and hence, whoever makes the best effort in linking into racism should be declared the winner.

What should I do when someone runs a framework?

If someone runs a framework, you have two main options. You can either contest the framework or link-in. If we choose to link into the Framework the Debate becomes a question of who “links-in” best or rather, who affects the framework the most. For instance, if you had an argument which impacted into some sort of racism and the opponent ran SV (structural violence) framing, you can argue that you “link-in” to SV framing because Racism is an institutionalized form of Structural Violence.

If you choose to contest the framework, however, you would make the argument that although the Framework is important, the judge should prioritize your impact over theirs. An example is extinction. You could say prefer extinction over racism framing because if everyone is dead, we cannot solve racism.

Why run Framing?

Framing makes a Debate way more interesting, and in many cases, it can make your job as a Debater much easier. Note that Framework should be run mostly on tech or sometimes flay judges.