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: Minseo Shin (Leaders Academy) vs. Opposition: Emiliano del Rio (Virgina shuman young)

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.

  • Minseo Shin
    Minseo Shin
    vs.



    Emiliano del Rio
    Emiliano del Rio
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at July 14, 2020 09:46:06AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at July 14, 2020 08:27:17PM EST by Emiliano del Rio

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at July 16, 2020 03:56:27AM EST by Minseo Shin

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at July 16, 2020 10:11:02PM EST by Emiliano del Rio

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at July 17, 2020 12:10:23PM EST by Minseo Shin

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at July 18, 2020 09:32:43PM EST by David Kane

    Category Minseo Shin Emiliano del Rio
    Use of evidence: 3 2
    Delivery skill: 3 2.5
    Coherence of arguments: 3 3
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4 2
    Identification of key points: 4 3
    Comments: Good job. Your opponent did not give you much to work with, but for the most part you responded well.

    Make sure you spend time to clearly carry over your arguments that your opponent did not respond to.

    The one thing your opponent raised that you didn't strongly rebut was the examples of UN failures.

    Throughout, you could use more evidence.
    Use your time. Your speeches could have been much longer. If they are longer you can make more arguments and share more evidence to support your case.

    Respond to your opponent. You brought up MLK. Your opponent responded with George Floyd as an example to show that MLK's vision had not been realized. In your rebuttal after that though, you just repeated your MLK argument. You didn't say anything about your opponent's response.

    Similarly, your opponent made an argument about science over culture in enacting laws, but you didn't say anything about that.

    Your examples of UN ineffectiveness were good, but you had plenty of time to have given those examples in your constructive speech.

    Avoid the phrase "I believe." As a debater, it doese not matter what you believe. You have to argue both sides of the topic no matter which side you believe is the "correct" one.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Minseo Shin

    Reason for Decision:

    Thank you for the debate.

    The decision goes for the proposition. The opposition did not directly refute most of the proposition's case. The proposition had a comprehensive response to all of of the topics the opposition raised.


    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