posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 07:06 AM
Originally posted by SonoftheSun
Then again, after re-reading the judgments about our Tied Match, and having spoken to Pinke about it, in our case, I think that there are high chances
that it would have come to the same result. But it might not be like that for all debates.
Yus, I imagine it wouldn't have changed much. At one point it seemed like one of the judges actually started arguing their own case.>.<
Not complaining, good debate. I imagine judges will get better as time goes on.
Regarding various comments about length ...
I understand Skyfloating's approach that seems to be being successful that three posts is getting more debates going. The evidence is there. It does
make it a bit harsh when the con position is getting a full pile of rebuttals in their closing statement, and then a judge assumes there was no
mistakes or answer to this.
I think part of the key to this is choosing a good topic or portion of a topic rather than a really really wide one. The Iran one seems like a good
topic in some ways IMO.
PS - there is a tonne I'd have done differently in a new debate on the same topic. Made a few errors.
edit on 4-9-2012 by Pinke because: