Judge: David Kane (Binghamton University)
Resolution: Resolved: The United Nation should require countries to uniformly enact substantial criminal justice reform in one or more of the following: forensic science, policing, sentencing.
|Click to begin|
Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.
Posted at June 30, 2020 01:19:58AM EST by Randy Serafin
Posted at July 1, 2020 01:11:51AM EST by Arthur Park
Posted at July 2, 2020 02:28:16AM EST by Randy Serafin
Posted at July 3, 2020 01:33:32AM EST by Arthur Park
Posted at July 4, 2020 01:53:31AM EST by Randy Serafin
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at July 4, 2020 10:03:44PM EST by David Kane
|Category||Randy Serafin||Arthur Park|
|Use of evidence:||3.5||3.6|
|Coherence of arguments:||3.5||4|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||3||4|
|Identification of key points:||3||4|
|Comments:||After a good start, the use of evidence trailed off as the debate progressed.
Be careful about accusing your opponent of lying. That is a strong word. In this case, it is mostly about a difference in judgement about the responsiveness of particular arguments.
Be careful about using correlation in your proposition argument https://xkcd.com/552/
|Please don't push the time like that. Especially in a recorded format like this, there is no reason to go that far over your allotted time. I knocked back your points in Delivery Skill.
I was a little surprised you didn't say anything about the opposition's use of correlation in the proposition speech. https://xkcd.com/552/
The decision is for the Opposition: Arthur Park
Reason for Decision:
Thank you for the debate.
The proposition didn't really say much about the UN in the proposition constructive, and only a little about uniformity.
The opposition effectively critiqued these aspects throughout the debate. The final rebuttal was the first time that the proposition presented an overall concept about what is meant by uniformity. Rather than articulate a clear vision for why the UN was the appropriate action the final rebuttal got into the weeds about whether topics were responded to appropriately in earlier speeches. The proposition never adequately answered to the question raised by the opposition about whether different countries with different cultural traditions would really accept uniform reform.
For these reasons, the opposition gets the decision.