• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

The Great GF Debate Event

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
This idea was proposed by Ilus_Unistus and since she didn't wanna do it herself, I said I would. Considering that I'm off work for a month, now is a good time for me to run this.

Basically, you sign up, and I split you off into an even number of teams. Hopefully teams of 2 or 3 or 4. If we only get two teams, that's fine, but it'd be awesome to get at least 4 teams.

Using names in a hat style selection, I'll form you guys onto these teams.

Then, I pick some topics of my choice for two teams to debate. One side will be for the proposed idea, and one team will be against. I'll flip a coin to decide which is which.

Then it's up to each team to research and come up with some arguments to support their side of the argument. I'll run the debates structured like I learned in highschool. I'll be the speaker, so each team posting would direct their arguments at me. The For team would be called the government, and the against team would be the Opposition. Each side has a leader, and his team members.

I'll create public groups for each team to discuss in and decide on arguments.

The government would present their arguments first, then the opposition would present their counters and a couple arguments of their own. etc etc. Each member of each team will get a chance to present for their team. So if a team has 3 people, then the debate would be about 8 posts long. 3 debate posts each, and a closing arguments post from each. Plus my posts, stating who goes next etc.

After each team presents their post, the other team will have 24 hours to prepare their counter arguments etc.

Because I'm even confusing myself with this explanation, here's a visual breakdown


-Opening post by me, presenting the topic and introducing the debate teams partaking in this debate.
-government makes opening arguments
-I thank the government and let the other team know to proceed.
-opposition counters the opening arguments if they can, and presents their own
-I thank opposition etc....
government counters opposition arguments. possibly presents some new ones of their own.
-i speak etc.
-opposition counters any of the new arguments, or counters the governments counters
etc etc till all the team members have spoken
-I invite teams to make their closing arguments.
-government closes with a summary of the points they have made and a summary of why the opposition 'is wrong'
-opposition does the same.

That'll be the thread. Then some judges that I'll pick, and myself, we'll apply a score to each team, based on how many arguments of yours go uncountered, how good your arguments are and how well you back them up and just how well you carry yourself in your arguments and such. Then whichever side has a higher score is the 'winner'.

For now I wanna see who wants to do this. So put down your john hancock!

I have a few other stipulations, but I have to write them out so the make sense first, and I'll edit this thread with them.
 

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
Let's rock it.

Kazmarov, guy who went to debate camp. Twice.
 

PretzelCorps

Registered Member
I'd be willing to partake if time constraints aren't incredibly strict. As usual, I can't vouch for my eternal presence.

Also, is this going to be all my-source-vs.-your-source, or can I still make logic-based points as I normally do in MD?
 
Last edited:

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
Yeah, what kind of debate is this. This sounds like parliamentary, but can we do a policy tint on it?
 

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
parliamentary is the only kind I know haha. Any suggestions are more than welcome of course.
 

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
Well we can fuse the main three:

Lincoln-Douglas- logic-based
Policy- evidence-based
Parliamentary- offense-defense of a policy

And make something where everyone can play.
 

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
You'll have to provide some links haha, i have no clue what those other two are.
 

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
The lincoln douglas seems to be above my head a bit haha. I'm having trouble understanding the great wall of wiki. The policy debate layout looks similiar to the kind I was thinking of, just using different terms. Maybe if you can explain them in your own words haha. Dumb it down for me a bit.
 

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
Lincoln-Douglas- don't bring documents, but use logic to debate something abstract like "healthcare is a right"

Policy- bring lots of documents to debate something abstract OR concrete like "torture works in providing valuable intelligence" or "healthcare is a right"
 
Top