Having spent roughly a year doing Parliamentary style debate at the college level and various forms of speech/debate all through high school (admittedly I ended

Having spent roughly a year doing Parliamentary style debate at the college level and various forms of speech/debate all through high school (admittedly I ended up doing mostly student-congress which is somewhat removed from direct adversarial debate but introduces other challenges), I find this article quite accurate about the state of HS debate. I wonder why at the college level (where the same kinds of "dropped argument" rules apply) the debate hasn't turned to 300 word-per-minute screeds (at least while I was competing). On a related note, I explicitly avoided policy debate in HS because of its non-sensical verbal vomit style, and by few experiences with Lincoln-Douglass (LD) just seemed too abstract. One of the things I liked at the college level was that teams would present cases that were a little more practical than LD without the "I need to memorize wikipedia and 3 years of the Economist then recite it all" aspects of Policy Debate (PD). Judges also had some discretion on judging whether the case was a fair case (the affirmative team presented a case of their invention usually), which helped curb abuse. I wonder if there's a way to replicate that flexibility at the HS level.