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: Zack Rosenberg (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Chandler Corzine (San Diego Christian College)

Judge: Rachel Cotrino (Binghamton University)

Resolution: Choice of Three

  • Zack Rosenberg
    Zack Rosenberg
    vs.



    Chandler Corzine
    Chandler Corzine
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at October 15, 2013 02:59:30AM EST by Zack Rosenberg

    Citations

    Show

    Preston, Cheryl B., Making Family-Friendly Internet a Reality: The Internet Community Ports Act. Brigham Young University Law Review, Vol. 2007, No. 6, pp. 1471-1533, 2007. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1146651

    Dr. Michele L. Ybarra and Kimberly J. Mitchell. CyberPsychology & Behavior. October 2005, 8(5): 473-486. doi:10.1089/cpb.2005.8.473.

    Flood, M. (2009), The harms of pornography exposure among children and young people. Child Abuse Rev., 18: 384400. doi: 10.1002/car.1092

    http://aclj.org/pornography/pornography-on-the-internet-in-the-community

    Posted at October 22, 2013 01:52:16AM EST by Chandler Corzine

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by N/A

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at November 5, 2013 01:28:47AM EST by Chandler Corzine

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at November 12, 2013 02:42:43AM EST by Zack Rosenberg

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at November 12, 2013 01:46:41PM EST by Rachel Cotrino

    Category Zack Rosenberg Chandler Corzine
    Use of evidence: 3.5 2.5
    Delivery skill: 2 3.5
    Coherence of arguments: 2.5 2.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4 4
    Identification of key points: 2 2
    Comments: Good use of evidence.

    Read less - speak more.

    I wish you had spoken more clearly, used less quotes, and used more of your own arguments and points to outline your case. It was very difficult to ascertain your actual plan.
    While I appreciated your criticism of his position, I am still unclear as to what your position is on the actual issues.

    I didn't think it was persuasive to discuss the purpose of debates and how it did not further your education - not a very persuasive argument as to why you should win on the merits.

    When you don't reply with hard facts, and instead attack your opposition's style and/or content, it seems like you are not prepared for the actual debate itself.

    Overall, I think you had good rebuttal points, but I think you could have organized them better.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Zack Rosenberg

    Reason for Decision:

    I ultimately voted in favor of Zack Rosenberg because his arguments were more substantive, better researched, and a bit more focused.

    Overall, I had a difficult time finding in favor of either side because both competitors seemed to have difficulty in organizing their respective positions. Instead of using their rebuttal opportunities to garner the facts to shore up their position, they instead used their rebuttal opportunities to dismantle the other side. I saw this tact used quite heavily by Chandler, which is why I voted in favor of Zack.


    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