|
Category: Society One of those 'you choose the resolution' debates in Extemporaneous speech form.This debate began on Monday, June 30, 2008, 8:02:29 PM Pacific Time.
Pro ~ Round 1
Essentially, this is a two round debate. Haste will be welcome, as I will leave for camp in two weeks. In R1 CON will post three distinctly different resolutions. I write an opening argument for one of the three in R2. It will be my privilege to decide what side I want to be on in said debate. HOWEVER, this is how it is different from 'dem udder debates'. Both PRO and CON must give their arguments in the common style of extemporaneous speech. Observe: 1. Intro A. Clever story/quote/joke/etc. B.Link to the topic C. Thesis (or question) 2. 1st point 3. 2nd point 4. 3rd point 5. Conclusion A. Restating Thesis (or answering question) B. Re-examining points C. Link back to intro I hope this can be fun. Thanks to my opponent. Con ~ Round 1
This round was forfeited because the debater did not post their argument within the allotted time. Pro ~ Round 2
Well my opponent has forfeited his round, and thus there is nothing to debate. I find forfeiting bad because we don't have fun and we don't learn anything. There was really no point to me starting this debate. Let's play 20 questions. I'm thinking of a famous person... Con ~ Round 2
This round was forfeited because the debater did not post their argument within the allotted time. Pro ~ Round 3
This debate is over. I hate forfeitures. I must have 100 characters so I will keep posting until I g Con ~ Round 3
This round was forfeited because the debater did not post their argument within the allotted time. Member Comments (5)Only members can post comments. I strongly negate the resolution which states Resolved: "One of those 'you choose the resolution' debates in Extemporaneous speech form." This indeed assumes that this debate is indeed "one of those debates." However, in my round one, I will not be posting any resolution for my opponent to pick from, therefore, this will not be one of those debates. It is the job of the affirmative to prove that it will be, but as I've shown, he cannot win this debate due to such assumption. Would anyone here buy the above (not that I would intend to use it)? 1 Month Ago
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||