Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

jmcowan

Members
  • Content Count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jmcowan

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Name
    John Cowan

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. yeah, i think you misread my post. i was saying the NEGATIVES were being whiny babies for complaining about losing a round where their responses fed the affirmative position. as far as the judge stopping the round instead of just voting affirmative goes, i wasn't there. did the affirmatives argue that this was the only solution? if they did, did the negatives argue that point back? if the judge just went rogue and stopped the round with neither team arguing that it should be stopped, that's either a bad judge OR the arguments the negatives were spewing were offensive enough to violate the school system's / debate league's standards. i wasn't there and the video doesn't show the whole round, so i don't know. also, where was the judge adaptation? if you know you have a hard left judge, why would you tack hard right? i mean, sure, if you have some inner need to do that, do it. but be prepared to OWN the framework flow. otherwise, you're gonna lose. the video skips the framework debate all together. i would LOVE to see the framework flow from this round, because the negatives say the affirmatives didn't make arguments about the role of the ballot and the affirmatives and the judge say they did.
  2. so, basically... "i wasn't prepared to answer the argument in a way that didn't feed the argument and ensure i would lose, so therefore debate is super gross and unfair"?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use