Fight Club Pub.

Originally posted by americandingbat
And reading old debates and judges' comments is really helpful, but it still doesn't get to what goes on during the debate, in terms of choices made and reasons why.

I find that I agree with what Sky said a page or two ago and that is every debate is different. I tend to go with an intuitive and completely unpredictable strategy in that I'll read my opponent's response and I'll just start tossing in 'random' phrases into the google search bar looking for something, a clue or hint on how I need to argue. While many times I have a specific idea of how I want to present any given case, I make concession for my opponent's presentation, which is always different.

It's a hit and miss process that has at times left me dejected but when it works it can be a doozey. I really think that 'strategy' paid off in my debate with Sublime in the previous tournament. Without that Nuclear Waste Conversion link, I would have probably been forced to interact more than would have been healthy with Sublime's rhetoric. I had no idea that nuclear waste could be converted; it was just a jab in the dark. And it threw him completely off balance.

So really it is about, at least for me, on looking for a substanial piece of direction or association that my opponent doesn't see coming. That and I like to avoid the same old arguments, though I think that I am starting to notice that I am becoming thematically repetitive...

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Shock, has our debate been judged yet?

-Sits on the bench with ADB, FSBA and Schro Dog-

Thanks Ian and Sky, for keeping it warm. Though whomever had the gum needs to realize that there was a waste receptacle mere yards away...

So I get the impression Unubuh has lost interest, so how about this. While reading through the Anti-US history propaganda that got posted in the Education forum, I have a few ideas if anyone would care to pick up.

Was the Mexican War the longterm catalyst for the US Civil War?

Would the United States had been better off had Franklin Roosevelt never been elected?

Should the United State's Constitution be rewritten completely to bring it in line with the modern age?

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
Should the United State's Constitution be rewritten completely to bring it in line with the modern age?

That is an excellent topic...

I am currently with Skyfloating in my scopes in about a week, so I won't take you up on it, but would like to say that the topic has the potential to be an incredible debate...

Perhaps Oscitate?

reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse


I concur, that is indeed an excellent topic.

I have to finish my debate with budski and then the audio-fight with chissler so I'm also gonna pass.

I'm sure someone will bite at this topic though.

Originally posted by MemoryShock
I find that I agree with what Sky said a page or two ago and that is every debate is different. I tend to go with an intuitive and completely unpredictable strategy in that I'll read my opponent's response and I'll just start tossing in 'random' phrases into the google search bar looking for something, a clue or hint on how I need to argue. While many times I have a specific idea of how I want to present any given case, I make concession for my opponent's presentation, which is always different.

I don't know, maybe it's just that I want someone to hold my hand through the process. And I do think I'll get better at reading the situation eventually. I'm just so at sea right now

*twiddles thumbs on Waiting Bench*

edit to add: TWISI and I will hopefully be starting a new debate on Monday if we can get a subject approved, so I can't do it either. You could post it in the Public Fight Clu Pub too and see if anyone takes you up on it there?

[edit on 11/8/08 by americandingbat]

Where the heck is Ian?

His aloofness towards his tournament win is devaluing my whole Raison d'être.
I hate when that happens.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


sugar crash maybe?

I'm currently experiencing a caffiene crash...

That said, I am off until Monday morning. I will try and check in tomorrow morning, but I have a full schedule.

See ya guys...

I'm heading out too, but I'll probably be back later tonight.

Mr. Shock, have a good weekend; SDog, see ya later

reply to post by schrodingers dog

reply to post by Ian McLean

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Now fast! Now slow! Don't conflate my banana-dance SDog! Bwahahaha!

Woah, residual sugar rush...

reply to post by Ian McLean


*curtsies to Ian*

Greetings, oh wonderful wordsmith!

*rises from curtsey*

Obeisance paid! So, what were you doing last night that got you so hung over, hmmm? Enquiring minds want to know.

*snaps photo of Ian with drink in his hand and eyes half-closed*

reply to post by TheWayISeeIt


Today I'm communicating more with smilies, rather than similes:

Congratulations, Ian!

That was a mighty debate you and Sky had going!

Originally posted by americandingbat

See, this is why it would be so great to have some kind of mentor set-up. Because I miss most of that subtext, and I doubt that I'm the only newbie who does. And reading old debates and judges' comments is really helpful, but it still doesn't get to what goes on during the debate, in terms of choices made and reasons why.

I think I could tell you exactly why I lost and why Ian won, but that would make you a danger in future debates.



Anyway...notice how I was unable to focus on one position and Ian was able to keep focus on one position throughout the debate? Thats one factor. The second judges judgement (Id love to know who that was), is a good mentoring-lesson.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I hear you're taking on Shock next.
Are you guys sure?
One of you is going to lose two in a row.

Originally posted by Ian McLean

*joins the dance*

Hmm, so what were you up to last night, Ian? A little jump start on the celebrations?

We beat Clemson and therefore today is officially awesome!