Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Molly Depew (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Victoria Aloupis (Binghamton University)

Judge: Brittney Bleyle (Austin Peay State University)

Resolution: RESOLVED: Video games glorifying gun violence should be banned.

  • Molly Depew
    Molly Depew
    vs.



    Victoria Aloupis
    Victoria Aloupis
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at N/A by Molly Depew

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by Victoria Aloupis

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by Molly Depew

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by Victoria Aloupis

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by Molly Depew

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at N/A by Brittney Bleyle

    Category Molly Depew Victoria Aloupis
    Use of evidence: 2.5 3
    Delivery skill: 3.5 3.5
    Coherence of arguments: 3.2 3.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.8 4.8
    Identification of key points: 3.2 3.8
    Comments: I would question the opposition's remarks about brain development. I'm pretty sure the brain doesn't just stop developing the moment you hit 18. I would be more clear about your counterplan at first because initially it did sound like the rating system that was already in place, but I'm glad you clarified in your next speech.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Victoria Aloupis

    Reason for Decision:

    I voted for the Opposition because I believe the counterplan solves best considering that the Proposition only cited evidence about children and not adults. If the Proposition had evidence applicable to both children or adults or if the Opposition had not called her out on the fact that it only talked about children, I may have voted the other way. I feel like both of you could be more clear about your impacts and how you solve for the issue at hand. You need to make sure the judge knows your plan is the best for xyz reasons.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT