I'm all for enforcing the rules, but you have this completely out of context. There's a difference between enforcing the rules and punishing violations. Punishment is only appropriate for cheating, but cheating is twofold: an unfair advantage AND the intention to gain it. When only one or neither of these is present, there is no merit for punishment whatsoever. All I'm saying is that the competitors should be given a chance to fix the issue in their speech, and if they don't, then they are in willful violation of the rules. That's enforcement, not
I'm not picketing for online script submission, but you can definitely not
make the case that there are not any tournament staff who could fit in checking scripts before the tournament. Our logistics coordinator for the region spent probably over 10 hours a week preparing for tournaments during this tournament season. Script submission would, depending on the tournament, probably take a single person between 5 and 10 hours to complete. It'd be very, very easy to ask competitors to email a PDF to a specific email address by a specific date, and it would be worth the time on both ends.
I believe that you're missing something here. While part of the reasoning behind punishing people for rule violations is to keep the playing field fair, the majority of the reasoning revolves around learning to follow the rules. This is something that a lot of homeschoolers lack, an ability to follow the rules consistently. Generally there is so much more leniency in the homeschool world than in the public school world. Deadlines, submission content, etc. can easily be shoved aside or overlooked. NCFCA is a representation of the real world when it comes to rules. It stresses that we need to learn to follow the rules, and if we can't learn to do this, then we're punished accordingly.
NCFCA can teach us rules without punishing us for inadvertently violating them. Rules for the sake of rules are a pointless infraction. It ultimately becomes like the Jews of the New Testament who make rules to bind people and then punish them or look down on them for their incrimental violations. NCFCA isn't nearly there yet, but those problems do exist.
But no, quite honestly, that's a rule violation that gives a definite advantage over those who follow the rules and totally memorize the speech.
No way. I don't know that you can say that it gives him an advantage to not know all of his script. If anything it makes him appear less professional and more disorganized. At least, that's been my experience. Cheating is twofold: an unfair advantage and the intention to gain it. In this case, neither is present.
I'd like to simply pose the question: Why? What good results from disqualifying/dropping somebody because they violated a rule? What good
does it do? Even if there's a kid who is the biggest jerk on the block who is determined that he is above the rules, than NCFCA isn't gonna convince him any different. That is not their job anyways. What good does it serve, for that guy, or for the one who wrote a great speech that everybody loved, but got dq'd because he missed a citation? How does that serve communication at all?
Jesus does not teach that you'll get punished for every little wrongdoing. He doesn't teach you that every time you fall you'll suffer for what you did wrong. He teaches that when you fall, he'll help you up. The entire rules/enforcement system is so twisted because it's based on the exact opposite of that. It's based on the fact that we need to do every little thing correctly or the officials and the other competitors will say "This is not fair, we're going to punish you, even though your speech was awesome."
Tell me, how is this okay? It's not.