It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Debate Tournament Commentary

page: 13
0
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Well, even if I knew who they were, I wouldn't bug the judges. I'm in no rush to start the next round, yet. Between fiance, family, friends, yardwork, workwork, honey-do list, chores, errands, getting ambushed by Ninja-Nazis in the parking lot each day, and the debates, I've had almost no time to devote to "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas".

As for the total word count per post vs. reply to questions thing, my inclination is more towards the 800 word limit. In realtime debates, you have a timer, which not only forces a quick response, but also limits the amount of information, questioning, or response, that an opponant can make. The 800-word limit serves much the same exact process, and is about what someone can read aloud in three-to-five minutes. The 24-hour post limit ensures promptness.

How to make the absolute best use of those 800 words per post, and 24 hour time limit should remain completely up to the debator. Studying how your opponent uses that time is an important factor in pre-emptive strikes and counter-measures. Is it better to barrage your judges with facts and figures in support of your side, or to badger your opponent with questions that take up more space to answer than they do to ask? Is it better to appeal to the hearts and minds, or cold clinical facts? Is it better to demonstrate your evidence clearly, or rely on the credentials of your sources? Is it better to use every last hour of your time limit to research thoroughly and write a solid argument, or is it better to past as soon as possible, thereby forcing your opponent to rush theirs?

None of these is a solid "right answer"; it depends on the debator's personal style. That style makes for a mark of uniqueness and familiarity with a debator, the same way that a baller might have a style of hook-shot.

Thus, I have to disagree with the prospect of a cross-examination round. This isn't mock trial. It's debate. Let the debators choose how they wish to spend their precious 800 words and 24 hours.




posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 08:13 AM
link   
thelibra, care to debate on the subject?


[edit on 7-15-2005 by junglejake]



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by thelibra

Thus, I have to disagree with the prospect of a cross-examination round. This isn't mock trial. It's debate. Let the debators choose how they wish to spend their precious 800 words and 24 hours.



I have seen the cross-examination used in formal debates quite a bit. It would stop people faffing on and bring the most salient points forward.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 10:13 AM
link   
ats debates aren't realyl debates. Most people don't have the time or mental inclination to get all formal like that. I look at ATS debates as a series of excellent well thought out posts, where any style or methods can be used to get your point across. This is rhetoric, not logical extraction. If we did move towards logical extraction, you'll begin to notice that the topics are very vague, sometimes one sided. It is through rhetoric that the topics are able to inspire a good debate, not logical extraction.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by howmuchisthedoggy
I have seen the cross-examination used in formal debates quite a bit. It would stop people faffing on and bring the most salient points forward.



Originally posted by junglejake
thelibra, care to debate on the subject?


Certainly!

Ladies and Gentlemen. I intend to prove that the 800 word/24 hour limits are quite enough, and need not be further burdened with crampings of style and harshenings of my mellow.

My opponent will argue that other places do this. Ladies and Gentlemen, I ask you. Are we in other places?

Ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, my opponent would certainly want you to believe that we need to have a cross-examination round. And they make a good case. Hell, I almost wanted one myself!

But ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider:

Ladies and gentlemen this...



...is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee—an eight foot tall Wookiee—want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense!
But more important, you have to ask yourself, what does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense!

Look at me, I'm a Libra defending the status quo, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense!

And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.

If Chewbacca lived on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.



[edit on 7/15/2005 by thelibra]



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 10:48 AM
link   
My friends, my opponent has already tried to define my position for me, assuming the 800/24 restriction is where I'm going to take the debate. My opponent has also used Chewie as his primary defense, never even bothering to think that George Lucas is dumb (boy, will I ever get flamed for that one
).

The 800/24 restriction on current debate tournaments has been effective and entertaining. It is a tried and true method. So was slavery, but the world grew and abandoned the concept of slavery and replaced it with the far more efficient and profitable concept of indentured servents. So to could the debates.

Now, I'm not saying we should abandon our current format, I just think we should add in different restrictions to really test the debators. The first stage could be a straight up 800 word 24 hour debate. However, the winners of that tier of competition will have displayed an ability to debate. Otherwise they would not have won. At the next level, it would make sense to throw an added complication into the frey to really weed out the extremely talented debators from those who are just talented. We would see rhetoric displayed on levels never before seen in human existance if we did this.

For the second tier, it could be a simpler challenge. We could allow one question to be asked by each debator that the other must answer or be disqualified in the 800/24 format. At the later tiers, we could mix it up a bit. Something that could be truely challenging for the finals would be along the lines of a presidential debate. Every one of the judges would pass one or two questions to the mods. The mods would present them on the thread one at a time. One person has 24 hours to respond with 800 words. After they have done this, the other person has 24 hours to refute the position, but using only 400 words. The mod would present the next question, and the person who only had 400 words last time would get the 800 position, etc. The tourney would be determined on the over all skills through the 13 or 26 questions. This way, even if one of the questions falls into your niche or realm of knowledge, chances are another won't and you'll have a handicap.

My opponent said, "If Chewbacca lived on Endor, you must acquit!" This defense is weak, Chewbacca is a fictional character, as is Endor a fictional place. He does not live there, and I do not acquit. The prosecution take a breather.


[Edited by Someone sometime]
[Edited by junglejake at 43-756-3843]
[Edited by smokescreen attempting to avoid disqualification]

[edit on 7-15-2005 by junglejake]



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by thelibra
If Chewbacca lived on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
[edit on 7/15/2005 by thelibra]


howmuchisthedoggy's head explodes...........

thelibra's dreaded Chewbacca Defense strikes again....!!



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Hey, if it works...

He sure is fond of that dang thing isn't he? I prefer the Darth Vader defense- "Oh yeah, well I'm your father!"



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by howmuchisthedoggy
howmuchisthedoggy's head explodes...........

thelibra's dreaded Chewbacca Defense strikes again....!!


ROFLMAO...

(ahem)


Originally posted by junglejake
My opponent has also used Chewie as his primary defense, never even bothering to think that George Lucas is dumb...



Originally posted by junglejake
It is a tried and true method. So was slavery


Ladies and Gentlmen, in his own words, my opponent brags about how much he hates Star Wars, and loves Slavery. How could we ever accept an idea from one such as this? Star Wars, which is as much a part of American culture as Coca Cola, and Slavery, which nearly destroyed our fair nation. Why, if I didn't know better, I'd say my opponent was Dutch! And did Austin Powers 3 not tell us about the evils of the Dutch?

Judges, if ye be men and women of good heart and sound mind, you must not let the thoughts of an mad Dutchman come to fruition. They must be crushed like the Blood Diamonds his kind reap through aparthaid, urban warfare, and environmental exploitation.

The current system of a maximum 800 words stifles the long-winded, and encourages very efficient use of language in order to get one's point across. The 24-hour time limit puts pressure upon the debator to respond fast, and research in the interim. These two restrictions together make for a very tough, but relatively fast-paced debate. They are just enough to make the situation tense and uncomfortable enough to completely engage any spare moment of time the debator has.

But as one would expect from people who encourage slavery, these restrictions on our freedom to respond are not enough! They would tie more ropes around our necks, bolt more chains to our ankles and wrists. Given their choice, we would likely be whipped as well, and not in that arousing way that makes for fun evenings! What will be next? Will the loser of each round be banned from the forum? Their family tortured? Perhaps fans of Star Wars will be rounded up into camps? Fans of sci-fi in general? Will these Dutchmen never cease their relentless assault upon our freedom?!?

Adding the requirement for answering an opponents questions opens the door to vast areas of abuse (which the Dutch are also fond of). Part of debating is knowing which questions to ignore, and which ones to reply to. If an opponent makes a completely inane claim or question towards the other, a cursory dismissal or complete disregard is sometimes neccesary, in order to be able to have enough space to get a larger point across or answer a more relevant question.

Perhaps a debate dealing with hard science requires 600 words to explain a concept that the judges may not be familiar with, and it is a decisive point. Must the debator be forced to waste their opportunity, so that they can answer an irrelevant question, one that was already addressed, or will be addressed at a later point? Perhaps I don't wish to tackle Question A in my 2nd response, because I know full well it will be covered in my 3rd Response.

I can see only two tactics for forcing the opponent to answer your questions, and that is to ask questions about material they've already covered. This would force the opponent to use up precious space on rehashed material that no one needed to read twice, without using that same space to present new material. The second tactic would be to force your opponent to explain something that adds nothing to their side of the case. For instance, in Round 1 of this tournament, under the addtional weight of restriction junglejake would have you add, The Vagabond could have forced me to explain the laws of thermo-dynamics in further detail, since I had made reference to them. Without plagurism, this would easily consume 100-300 words just to get a foundation.

Ladies and Gentlemen, a vote for mandatory answers and mandatory questioning is a vote for ropes, chains, whips, and cages (again, not the good kind). It is a vote for slavery. It is a vote against Star Wars, and a slap in the face of those who enjoy freedom of expression. And most heinous of all, a vote for the Dutch!



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Lousy Dutch and Anti-Star-Wars mongers........Makes me wanna.......















[edit on 15-7-2005 by MemoryShock]



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by thelibra
Ladies and Gentlmen, in ... my ... love ... [for] Slavery[,] How could we ever accept an idea from one such as this? Why, if I d


This post was part of a special Halloween Homage to Orson Wells.
Jumping out from behind the server and shouting BOO!
n't know better, I'd say ... Dutch! Dutch?

Judges, ... the Blood Diamonds[,] aparthaid, urban warfare, and environmental exploitation[,] The current system of a maximum 800 words ... encourages[.]...

[M]ore ropes around our necks, bolt more chains to our ankles and wrists[!]
Ladies and Gentlemen, a vote for mandatory answers and mandatory questioning is a vote for ropes, chains, whips, and cages (again, ... the good kind). It is a vote for slavery.


Wow, I had no idea you had such positive feelings for slavery and bondage. I suppose I rest my case, my opponent just made it for me





posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   
What the?!
That was supposed to be a [ o ] inside of the d and the n't. Lemme try that again...

d


This post was part of a special Halloween Homage to Orson Wells.
Jumping out from behind the server and shouting BOO!
n't

If it happened again, I think this will call for more experimentation with things inside of brackets!


DOOOOOOOD!!! That's awesome! W[h]a[t] [e]ls[e] [s]


This post was part of a special Halloween Homage to Orson Wells.
Jumping out from behind the server and shouting BOO!
[t] [t][h][e][r][e][?][!]

[edit on 7-15-2005 by junglejake]



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
(bursts out laughing)

(regains composure)


Originally posted by junglejake
Wow, I...had...slavery...I suppose I rest my case...
my opponent...(is)...just


Do you see now, that even so much as bringing up the subject of mandatory questions causes so much interference in the server loads that it disrupts the dead and renders posts unreadable, IN ADDITION to giving the Dutch delusions of granduer. We cannot allow this to happen on ATS.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Hey, the libra misquoted me! I never said (is), and as we all know if you're going to explain something or make it clearer in the midst of a quote, brackets are to be used. So thelibra misquoted me, breaking the rules, and drops out of the debate. Junglejake wins!



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Hey, the libra misquoted me! I never said (is), and as we all know if you're going to explain something or make it clearer in the midst of a quote, brackets are to be used. So thelibra misquoted me, breaking the rules, and drops out of the debate. Junglejake wins!


Ah, but you did say it. Unfortunately, the interference from the late Mr. Wells removed it from the original post. In fact, it wiped out a lot of things. I seem to recall there were also a few paragraphs about how much you hate puppies and kittens too. However, as these were not relevant points, I chose to leave them out...

So...er....still in! Yay!



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   
You all are wrong. Nuff said. Debate over



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
I'd like to say not to use that code, it's a special one for a special reason. It's cool, but doesn't help when accused of dis-info.

Oh, and you're all batty. Remind me to read all those posts and laugh at you all. I have a feeling those will be better than your actual debates.

BURN3D!!!



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Oh, and you're all batty. Remind me to read all those posts and laugh at you all. I have a feeling those will be better than your actual debates.

BURN3D!!!


What! Squak! Bawk! Squak! Squak! Bawk! Squak! Squak! Bawk! Squak! Bakw!! Bawk! Bawk!

You turned me into a hair brained chicken!


i R redy to dbate nw!!!!



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Please note that I was nowhere near ktpr when he all of a sudden, for no reason, just lost his mind..........Now everyone......look at this hand over here and forget about ktpr...I'm afraid he is a lost cause....


ktpr.......you are getting very sleepy.......



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Ga ga ga.

is that you momma? *drools*




top topics



 
0
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join