Yes...There is an actual Snowflake Handbook.

[Jude]

Here's a video that shows how debating has changed and how how many
of the young people from Universities and Colleges take their feelings and
faculty-nurtured guilt into a forum where specific issues are discussed.

It's fine that people have different opinions and it's normal to show verve
behind their veracity to lay their case before the one who they wish to convince.
But the goal of a debate -in my view, is to show a confident display of information
with rational facets of fact to use in persuasion.
The 'winning' is secondary and merely an outcome.

But with this 'snowflake' document it seems that the success aspect is everything
and I'm struggling to find any paragraph that refers to ethical honesty and the act
of only using verifiable facts.

It tends to lean more towards weasel-words like 'story-telling' and 'metaphors' to
use as tools in a debate arena.
Freaking' story-telling?!!!

Anyway, listen to the level of emotions from either debater in this video and see
what you think. You can skip to near the end if you wish as the subjects are not
relevant to what we're discussing on this thread.

Caveat: Everyone is entitled to have their own political view.

Well said.

In Uni we had debates either planned or spontaneous on the grounds. It was the era of debates.

It seems that waaaaayyyyyy back then we prided ourselves on research, facts, the art of rebuttal and even our understanding of argument in Psych 101. Shouting to be louder, name calling, tears etc were simply a sign of weakness and a piss poor debate artist.

AND...sometimes we even took the opposite side to understand what the hell we were debating!

I'm getting so tired.

Jude