The process of finding evidence in Policy debate is often tedious and boring. The fact that debaters have to discuss the same topic for an entire year means that the debates become boring and repetitive.
Other important things in a debate, such as inferring, thinking, and speaking rhetorically, are deprioritized to make way for evidence.
Because of how much time debaters spend prepping, many are forced to use the tactic known as “spreading”, in which debaters speak really fast to try and get through all of their evidence. The problem with this is that debaters never end up actually discussing or arguing for their side. They are simply reading someone else’s opinion or data on something.
When another team presents an argument, their opposing team’s response will simply be to give more evidence and arguments in return to try and show that they have out prepped their opponents. If participants are not actually thinking about the world and are simply copying and pasting as much evidence as possible, then this gets rid of the point of debate.