You need to tell the story of your aff, and why it SOLVES for ___ and ___. etc... You should also be speaking louder, with more confidence, and faster. Your giving your opponent all the more reason to use LESS prep time. Which means they have MORE to prep for the 2nr.
To be a truly good debater you need to examine an issue from the bottom up. Science is the truest form of debate. It's the never ending search for the true nature and laws of the Universe.
OH my goodness. learn how to debate. sure it's oral communication, but debate is about weighing arguments. this is not policy. this is glorified extemporaneous speaking.
This is Policy Debate! you made so few arguments in your 2AC! Your not supposed to talk to the audience, you should say your evidence and arguments and move on!
@awesomeballer123 It's all about communicating to the audience. If you fail to communicate, you fail to persuade. This isn't about speed and spread, it's about quality. :) Thanks for watching though.
@mrconceeded If it is entirely about speech, then you are rewarding lying through your teeth over making a fully coherent and logical case.
This is the problem with modern politics. People only agree with the guy who speaks nicely and uses "convincing" words. No one cares about the "boring guy" who focuses on the content over the shallow aspects of flowery speech.
Logic is by far superior to presentation, and as such should be the entire basis of the judge's ballot.
@PKNproductions I'm not saying it's ALL about speech. I'm saying that learning how to communicate well is a more important skill than learning how to communicate quickly (speed and spread debate) like awesomeballer123 said. Content and quality of communication is absolutely important as you point out. However, being able to communicate truth *well* is better than being the "boring guy."
@mrconceeded Still, as long as the judge understands what is going on, the actual speech (intonation, speed, etc.) should not be considered for judging anything except speaker points. The determination of the winner should be based entirely on superior logic and info. The debater's speech style should not influence the judge's ballot.
Logic and hardwork (research) can not be taught in a class. It requires experience. Debate exists for this. If you wanna learn to speak, take a class.
@PKNproductions Debate is a self defeating concept. By choosing a position without considering all the evidence you make a wrong assumption in the first place. You let that assumption affect your whole argument. It's a waste of time. Stop trying to defend a horrible self defeating waste of time.
@drinkmouse The affirmative creates their case entirely using evidence. Therefor there position is not made without evidence. The negative formulates their opposition strategy after hearing the affirmative's case including all their evidence, meaning that their side it also not determined till the evidence is considered.
@tbonekcmo I understand perfectly. You study both sides of the argument so you're able to counteract their points etc. I would think that trying to guess the other teams position and evidence would be advantageous to your winning. Yawn....
@PKNproductions Seriously? It's about thinking on your feet, and using your evidence to persuade someone of something while using speaking skills. If you can say something convincingly against your opponent well and professionally, you are an excellent debater and should win the round. I get high speaker points in most rounds, but that doesn't mean we win every round. The judges are trained to vote mainly on content, but also take presentation into consideration.
@mrconceeded Well, by audience do you mean mainly judges? I usually try to communicate most to the judges because they're the ones checking the box, but I see what you're saying. It's better to also have the audience following too, and laughing, crying, and screaming in rage ;p jk My main strategy is almost always personal appeals, and direct impacts.
You need to tell the story of your aff, and why it SOLVES for ___ and ___. etc... You should also be speaking louder, with more confidence, and faster. Your giving your opponent all the more reason to use LESS prep time. Which means they have MORE to prep for the 2nr.
Herculaneus 1 week ago
This is NCFCA (national christian forensic league) which talks much, much, much more slowly than NFL (national forensics league) policy.
Frecciasful 1 month ago
lolol he speaks so slowly
daminkymonkey 2 months ago
@daminkymonkey NCFCA; we try to let the judges keep up with us ;)
giwannabe13 1 week ago
he's cute...
fallin2pieces96 3 months ago
@shizleconjuror Don't test me mortal. You won't win.
drinkmouse 6 months ago
Policy debate: pretentious pompous tomfoolery. :)
drinkmouse 6 months ago
@drinkmouse Whoa whoa whoa whoa homeboy... :p
giwannabe13 1 week ago
Thank you for actually talking. I'm new to policy, but the concept of spreading seems immensely pretentious.
KirbehsBizzatch 6 months ago
To be a truly good debater you need to examine an issue from the bottom up. Science is the truest form of debate. It's the never ending search for the true nature and laws of the Universe.
Thumbs up if you agree!
drinkmouse 7 months ago
Policy Debate: Exactly what the Bible warns us about. We are not gods. The Apple of Knowledge represents Policy Debate.
drinkmouse 7 months ago
Comment removed
drinkmouse 7 months ago
Comment removed
drinkmouse 7 months ago
@buzzkillington12 lawl you obviously have no conception of how LD wordks
chairmobile 9 months ago
HOW THE HELL DO I FLOW THIS?
answer, you don't.
kj762aa 9 months ago
OH my goodness. learn how to debate. sure it's oral communication, but debate is about weighing arguments. this is not policy. this is glorified extemporaneous speaking.
tantheman6254 11 months ago
@tantheman6254 He did weigh the arguments. Hurr durr.
quenwolf 3 months ago
Wait, this is policy? But I can actually understand what you are saying!
xXSpudmeister94Xx 1 year ago 11
@xXSpudmeister94Xx Lemme guess: You're an LD'er :p
giwannabe13 1 week ago
Comment removed
dawnuld 1 year ago
Beautiful speech, Josh. I miss debating with you!
melodyofmysoul 1 year ago
I'm gonna take a shot in the dark and say this guy does extemp as his IE?
enfernox 1 year ago 2
This is Policy Debate! you made so few arguments in your 2AC! Your not supposed to talk to the audience, you should say your evidence and arguments and move on!
awesomeballer123 1 year ago 4
@awesomeballer123 It's all about communicating to the audience. If you fail to communicate, you fail to persuade. This isn't about speed and spread, it's about quality. :) Thanks for watching though.
mrconceeded 1 year ago 5
@mrconceeded If it is entirely about speech, then you are rewarding lying through your teeth over making a fully coherent and logical case.
This is the problem with modern politics. People only agree with the guy who speaks nicely and uses "convincing" words. No one cares about the "boring guy" who focuses on the content over the shallow aspects of flowery speech.
Logic is by far superior to presentation, and as such should be the entire basis of the judge's ballot.
PKNproductions 1 year ago 2
@PKNproductions I'm not saying it's ALL about speech. I'm saying that learning how to communicate well is a more important skill than learning how to communicate quickly (speed and spread debate) like awesomeballer123 said. Content and quality of communication is absolutely important as you point out. However, being able to communicate truth *well* is better than being the "boring guy."
mrconceeded 1 year ago
@mrconceeded Still, as long as the judge understands what is going on, the actual speech (intonation, speed, etc.) should not be considered for judging anything except speaker points. The determination of the winner should be based entirely on superior logic and info. The debater's speech style should not influence the judge's ballot.
Logic and hardwork (research) can not be taught in a class. It requires experience. Debate exists for this. If you wanna learn to speak, take a class.
PKNproductions 1 year ago
@PKNproductions Debate is a self defeating concept. By choosing a position without considering all the evidence you make a wrong assumption in the first place. You let that assumption affect your whole argument. It's a waste of time. Stop trying to defend a horrible self defeating waste of time.
drinkmouse 7 months ago
@drinkmouse The affirmative creates their case entirely using evidence. Therefor there position is not made without evidence. The negative formulates their opposition strategy after hearing the affirmative's case including all their evidence, meaning that their side it also not determined till the evidence is considered.
PKNproductions 7 months ago
@drinkmouse You obviously don't understand. You don't get to choose your position.
tbonekcmo 6 months ago
@tbonekcmo I understand perfectly. You study both sides of the argument so you're able to counteract their points etc. I would think that trying to guess the other teams position and evidence would be advantageous to your winning. Yawn....
drinkmouse 6 months ago
@mrconceeded "its all about communicating to the audience"-mrconceeded in his response toawesomeballer123.
shizleconjuror 6 months ago
@PKNproductions Seriously? It's about thinking on your feet, and using your evidence to persuade someone of something while using speaking skills. If you can say something convincingly against your opponent well and professionally, you are an excellent debater and should win the round. I get high speaker points in most rounds, but that doesn't mean we win every round. The judges are trained to vote mainly on content, but also take presentation into consideration.
giwannabe13 1 week ago
@mrconceeded speed and spread.
kj762aa 9 months ago
@mrconceeded Well, by audience do you mean mainly judges? I usually try to communicate most to the judges because they're the ones checking the box, but I see what you're saying. It's better to also have the audience following too, and laughing, crying, and screaming in rage ;p jk My main strategy is almost always personal appeals, and direct impacts.
giwannabe13 1 week ago
brilliant job, well done
i just have to point out two things
1- even though this is a debate, i still think that you were speaking so fast! which isn't a good thing
2-you should be a bit more organized like in 1:4 - in 5:48 and in 6:24 you should've avoid that
3- avoid looking at your note that often
over all it was a 9/10 love it
a7medsarCA 1 year ago