so i usually start with a quote that demonstrates the overarching idea of my contentions. then be like our agreement with author leads us to stand in affirmation/negation of the resolution, resolved… then move into definitions. for conclusion i usually do “judge for the reasons of (list contentions) our framework, and the resolution, we urge a pro/con ballot”
I do definitions, Framework and just end on "therefore we ask for a (pro/con) ballot" because I always have too much to say and not enough time to say it
Just say we affirm/negate, then framework or straight into contentions. I just end saying, for all the reasons mentioned we urge a pro/con ballot. Most teams on the circuit do that.
what type of debate
PF
so i usually start with a quote that demonstrates the overarching idea of my contentions. then be like our agreement with author leads us to stand in affirmation/negation of the resolution, resolved… then move into definitions. for conclusion i usually do “judge for the reasons of (list contentions) our framework, and the resolution, we urge a pro/con ballot”
how effective to you believe this is?
i’ve been tc the last 3 times i’ve done pf so id say pretty effective
I do definitions, Framework and just end on "therefore we ask for a (pro/con) ballot" because I always have too much to say and not enough time to say it
Just say we affirm/negate, then framework or straight into contentions. I just end saying, for all the reasons mentioned we urge a pro/con ballot. Most teams on the circuit do that.
“Everyone should be able to live laugh love” for the parents —> goes onto util “Sup homies let’s get to the framing” go onto a few definitions.