I'm not sure how many of you have ever been in a real debate outside of the debate forum, but generally, in a debate, it is not often held in any similar way to the forum. I would like to try to hold a more 'official' debate on this forum.
Basically, how it would work, is people would sign up. Because it's an official debate, there would only be four people in the debate, at least, doing the actual posting. You could form 'teams', but only two people would actually get to post in the topic. It has been a while since I've done a debate in real life, but if I recall correctly, the format goes something like this...
First affirmative's argument
First negatives argument
Second affirmative's argument
Second negative's argument
Cross Examination/QA
1st Negative's Closing
1st Affirmative's Closing
The first affirmative/negative should each state their position in the case, and define the terms. For example, "Good morning, judges, my honorable opponents, ladies and gentlemen. Today, we are here to debate, "Be it resolved that homosexual marriage should be allowed in Canada." First, let me define the terms. Homosexual means to have sexual attraction to someone of the same gender. Marriage means a loving relationship between two, made official by a ceremony, that is intended to last for their entire lives. Therefore, homosexual marriage would be two people of the same gender, officially recognising their love and intent to be together forever. We, the affirmative, believe that gay marriage should be allowed in Canada, for these reasons..."
The first negative should also state the terms, if they disagree with the affirmative, or they should accept the affirmative terms. For example, "Good morning, judges, my honorable opponents, ladies and gentlemen. Today, as my opponent has stated, we are here to debate "Be it resolved that homosexual marriage should be allowed in Canada." I agree with my opponents term of homosexual, but their definition for marriage is incorrect. Marriage is a legally-bonding document between two people..." etc.
I would like to 'host' a debate that was a little more 'formal' here on ZFGC, following this general format. So (unless the mods have a problem with this), consider this topic the official topic for setting this debate up. Since I will not be the only person participating in this debate (if I even get to
), I'm not gonna take charge and make anything 'official', but here's my suggestions for how thigns *should* be.
1) 2 positive and 2 negative actually get to post. There will be time to research/prepare, and people can discuss the debate beforehand, provide information, etc., but when it's crunch time, only the actual debaters may post.
2) 3 Judges is how it typically runs, and after the debate, the judges individually decide who they think had the stronger arguments, and cast their votes without seeing the others. (As such, we would also need a 'head judge' to collect these votes).
3) No one may post in the official debate topic other than the debators, and then the head judge will announce who won, then each judge will post their evaluation of the debate.
4) Each 'argument' post cannot be more than 1000 words. They can have multiple arguments in the post. They can be shorter. (a little more, example, 1042, woudl be acceptable, but don't push it)
5) The debate would follow the following format:
Post:
1st: First Affirmative
2nd: First Negative
3rd: Second Affirmative
4th: Second Negative
5th: 2nd Affirmative: asks negative (up to) five questions
6th: 1st Negative: answers questions
7th: 2nd Negative: asks affirmative (up to) five questions
8th: 1st affirmative: answers questions
9th: 1st Negative, closing statement
10th: 2nd negative, closing statement
11th: Head Judge, winner announced
12th: 1st judge, feedback
13th: 2nd judge, feedback
14th: 3rd judge, feedback
6) although there may be people helping form arguments (coaches if you will) for each team, no more than two people outside of the debators, because if one side is more popular than another, then they will have more people providing information, and it won't be fair to the actual debators)
7) Remember that, when you're up there presenting your arguments, you also have a chance to rebutt your opponents arguments.
8 )
STATE SOURCES!!As for a topic, well, it'd be NICE to do something new that hasn't been done on ZFGC yet. Something where there are actual stats to be researched, something that is currently effecting the world. I was thinking we could do a debate on Canada's Annual Seal Hunt - "Be It Resolved that Canada's Annual Seal Hunt be discontinued." (And yes, any other topics of interest are possible too, this is just one that I think is interesting and that it woudl be interesting to see debated.) (for those that do not know what this is, here's a quick article:
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32695)
I'm thinking two weeks should be enough time to form teams and get organised, so the Saturday after next (April 29th) would probably be a good date for this. (aka, if you're in, that's the day that you'd actually post your arguments, you have up until then to refine them.)
If anyone else is interested in a debate such as this, or has any suggestions, feel free to post...
just for reference sake, I'm going to hold a list here of people interested in being involved and what they'd like to do..
Current Debate Topic:Be It Resolved that Canada's Annual Seal Hunt be discontinued
Affirmative Alex
NegativeHead JudgeJudges-=Limey=-
Author
Topic: An 'official' debate (Read 3096 times)