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: Jeff Aberman (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Kelvan Pilot (San Diego Christian College)

Judge: Amanda Jaret (Binghamton University)

Resolution: Choice of Three

  • Jeff Aberman
    Jeff Aberman
    vs.



    Kelvan  Pilot
    Kelvan Pilot
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at October 15, 2013 02:14:15AM EST by Jeff Aberman

    Citations

    Show

    1. Monitor's Editorial Board / October 7, 2013 Website .. http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2013/1007/Britain-s-battle-against-online-porn

    2. Dr. Michele L. Ybarra Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005 Oct;8(5):473-86. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16232040

    3.Internet Community Ports Act
    http://www.cp80.org/resources/0000/0013/Internet_Community_Ports_Act.pdf

    4.Porn has changed for the worse. Even men have noticed Joan Smith Honorary Associate of the National Secular Society http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/porn-has-changed--for-the-worse-even-men-have-noticed-8846457.html

    Posted at N/A by N/A

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at October 29, 2013 01:15:44AM EST by Jeff Aberman

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by N/A

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at November 12, 2013 01:24:05AM EST by Jeff Aberman

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at November 14, 2013 07:07:18PM EST by Amanda Jaret

    Category Jeff Aberman Kelvan Pilot
    Use of evidence: 4.8 2.5
    Delivery skill: 3 3.8
    Coherence of arguments: 4.1 3.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 2.3 3.2
    Identification of key points: 4.8 4.8
    Comments: Really nice use of evidence and varied sources. I really appreciated your thoughtful discussion of the constitutional authority in this area, but you should just make sure you answer all the arguments that the negative makes- he doesn't seem to contest the constitutionality of your plan, but rather its topicality. If you had done that, you would have won this debate. You should also try to speak a bit more clearly, though it may just be that the video quality was a little poor here. Good job, and best of luck! You are a good and persuasive speaker, especially during your rebuttal. Check the pronunciations of these words for next time: "prima facie," "substantive," and "specificity." I wish you had introduced more evidence to support your spending disad. Thank you for sharing your case with me- good luck!

    The decision is for the Opposition: Kelvan Pilot

    Reason for Decision:

    See video! Please note that this is a low-point win. I think that Kelvan wins on topicality because Jeff never responds to it sufficiently or addresses the voters (resolution integrity, fairness, education, etc.), but I think Jeff was the better debater in the round because of his use of evidence and creative plan. Best of luck!

    Video from the judge:


    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