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

Trevor Reddick

Trevor Reddick
General Information
Name: Trevor Reddick
Affiliation: Unaffiliated
Join Time: February 3, 2013 at 04:51PM EST
Send Message: You must Create an Account and Log-In to message users.
Debating Statistics
Wins: 0 (0 are Byes)
Losses: 0 (0 are Forfeits)
Average Points (Out of 30): 0 (0 total)
*Opponent Wins: 0
*Opponent Points: 0
Judging Statistics
Total Rounds Judged: 17
Average Points Given (Out of 30): 20.3
Voted Proposition In: 47.06% of rounds
Voted Opposition In: 52.94% of rounds
Average Length of Notes (Characters): 1848.8 (31430 total)
Matches
Current: None
Past:

Bearcat Classic (Grades 6-12)

Show

BU's 4th Annual Online Debate Tournament in Conjunction with NASA Astrobiology Debates

Show

Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

Intralinked Debate - The 5th Semesterly Evans Cup

Show

Round 1

Round 2

Binghamton University's 2nd Annual Online Debate Tournament

Show

Round 1

Round 2

RHET 354 Class Tournament (The Evans Cup)

Show

Round 1

Round 2

*Does not count opponents in bye or forfeit rounds.

Other
About Me: Hey! I'm Trevor.

I debated in high school and college. After college I coached debate for Binghamton University and Baylor University, where I studied Communications.

I used to work in real estate, but moving into non-profit and environmental sustainability work. I love to read. Lately I've been getting into philosophy, design, and architecture. I've also been getting into bouldering, currently working on V0-V3 level problems!
Judge Philosophy: My emphasis is on process over product.

The best debates involve responding to the best version of your opponents arguments. It also involves a strong engagement with the support, or evidence, your opponent uses to justify their position.

This means that telling me:
- why their evidence is bad
- why it doesn't say what they think it says
- why it doesn't effectively support what they say
- why compelling counter-evidence should be preferred
are all great ways to get me to vote for you.

I find that the most compelling speeches tell me what arguments to prioritize when evaluating the debate, and why you still win even if your opponent's evaluative metric is deemed preferable. Don't just explain what your position is, explain why I should care about your position.

Do what you do, and have fun!
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