Judge: Brittney Bleyle (Austin Peay State University)
Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.
|Click to begin|
Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.
Posted at May 25, 2020 12:23:32PM EST by Zoella Lin
Posted at May 27, 2020 03:07:11AM EST by Owen Schwartz
Posted at May 28, 2020 11:29:39AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz
None available for this speech.
Posted at May 29, 2020 03:29:57AM EST by Owen Schwartz
Posted at May 30, 2020 12:01:47AM EST by Zoella Lin
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at May 31, 2020 12:07:30AM EST by Brittney Bleyle
|Category||Zoella Lin||Owen Schwartz|
|Use of evidence:||5.5||3.1|
|Coherence of arguments:||5.7||4.3|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||5.9||3.8|
|Identification of key points:||5.8||3.9|
|Comments:||Nice seeing you debate again! Again, I think it's pretty terrible that you get misgendered in every round I watch of yours and I'm sorry you have to endure that. I think that you really improved on your clarity this round, and I agree with your decision to slow down (even though your opponent still thinks you're speaking quickly). I think in this format you probably don't have to spread unless debating against another debater who you think will be spreading, and I thought the speed in this round was perfect.||Great debate! You are a really confident speaker and speak very clearly, which is great. I think that it would help you to have more framing in your last speech. For example, focus on impact framing, and maybe add a role of the ballot. The role of the ballot tells me as a judge how I should use my ballot to vote, and it would really help you in this round hedge against all of your opponent's framing arguments and your opponent's role of the ballot argument.|
The decision is for the Proposition: Zoella Lin
Reason for Decision:
I end up voting for the proposition. I think that the opposition conceded the proposition's framework and role of the ballot. The role of the ballot is very important to answer and address, because it is the debater's argument about how I should use my ballot to vote as a judge. The role of the ballot was "vote for the team that best destabilizes man." The proposition also states that only epistemology and in round solvency matters. Since this goes unaddressed, I'm persuaded by the proposition that the opposition doesn't have a method of in round solvency, and that the proposition has provided the best epistemological practices and solvency this debate. I think that the proposition's multi-culturalism disad to the opposition's common sense arguments is persuasive and is enough to take out those arguments.