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: Elaine Wei (Unaffiliated) vs. Opposition: Zachary Feldman (Binghamton University)

Judge: James Stanescu (Mercer University)

Resolution: Choice of Three

  • Elaine Wei
    Elaine Wei
    vs.



    Zachary Feldman
    Zachary Feldman
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at N/A by Elaine Wei

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by N/A

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at October 28, 2013 10:49:33PM EST by Elaine Wei

    Citations

    Show

    www.propublica.org
    www.tampabay.com

    Posted at October 29, 2013 03:03:53AM EST by Zachary Feldman

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at November 11, 2013 07:39:26PM EST by Elaine Wei

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at November 16, 2013 01:09:17AM EST by James Stanescu

    Category Elaine Wei Zachary Feldman
    Use of evidence: 3.4 3.1
    Delivery skill: 2.6 1.6
    Coherence of arguments: 4.1 3.2
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.8 2.6
    Identification of key points: 5 1.6
    Comments: Your final speech video is cut off, about half a minute left.

    Otherwise, you were doing a good job. But, if your opponent had not gone over his speech time, there is a good chance that you could have been hurt by that goof.
    In your constructive, I would not spend as much time explaining the background of the Martin/Zimmerman incident.

    In terms of your rebuttal, first you go way over. Second, you really need to clearify voters. What should I, as a judge, vote on at the end of this round?

    I think you present a strong case for the virtue of bravery in the first speech, but the prop pulls out her Aristotle, and you let that go. You rely that it is harm neutral, which is going to be a hard case to prove. You should go for net good, and argue that at worse it is harm neutral.

    You ultimately need a stronger opening strat. Maybe even a counter-intuitive one. Like, mayber stand your ground laws are good because they make racism overt? Or they critique the sovereign's claim to monopoly of violence? You need something.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Elaine Wei

    Reason for Decision:

    I vote that the final speech is significantly over time, and therefore disquals the opp. It was a good job by both sides, who both had tech issues with the final videos, and I am sorry to vote on such a technicality, but there you have it.


    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