Discussion About OTz Team Debates

[debbie t]

ofcourse ,if presented with an atomic blast one does need to be wearing cool and effective shades

it went in a straight line ,then it deviated -up-over-under totally unrelated-wirh good points on both sides...but ..it we ever had an otz debating team we would never win a single trophy

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

ofcourse ,if presented with an atomic blast one does need to be wearing cool and effective shades

it went in a straight line ,then it deviated -up-over-under totally unrelated-wirh good points on both sides...but ..it we ever had an otz debating team we would never win a single trophy

Just thought about this as I saw your post.

You know what might be a good idea?

What if like how they have a debating competition...where they have 2 sides: 1 for......1 against.

The OTz Debating (insert name here). Here's how it could work:

For our members who are keen on debating (and we have a few ), 2 sides are drawn up from a list of interested members (AEF of course, Badboy, Intruder, Dodge, Pudding, Tim, SRC, gLing, Debs etc etc).......prolly let's say each side consists of 5 people.

A subject for debating is determined beforehand (giving time for research).
Debating begins and each side puts forward their arguments "For" or "Against" depending on which one assigned.

This could be a monthly or bi-monthly exercise (or whatever).
The nice thing about this is would allow the debators to think outside the box to present ideas and opinions on any given subject apart from their own personal beliefs.

I would go to that show. I wonder if anyone else thinks this is a good idea? I would love to see that.

 

[debbie t]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

i think that would be excellent .
i like the idea that you may have to bebate for something you personnaly are against
i like that you may be on a team with people you usually disagree with ,so have to cooperate
i just like it
also debates cannot go off at tangents in real scenarios or you get disqualified.

CB stands for clever bugger:24:..

 

[gLing]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Just thought about this as I saw your post.

You know what might be a good idea?

What if like how they have a debating competition...where they have 2 sides: 1 for......1 against.

The OTz Debating (insert name here). Here's how it could work:

For our members who are keen on debating (and we have a few ), 2 sides are drawn up from a list of interested members (AEF of course, Badboy, Intruder, Dodge, Pudding, Tim, SRC, gLing, Debs etc etc).......prolly let's say each side consists of 5 people.

A subject for debating is determined beforehand (giving time for research).
Debating begins and each side puts forward their arguments "For" or "Against" depending on which one assigned.

This could be a monthly or bi-monthly exercise (or whatever).
The nice thing about this is would allow the debators to think outside the box to present ideas and opinions on any given subject apart from their own personal beliefs.

I would go to that show. I wonder if anyone else thinks this is a good idea? I would love to see that.

Would we get to take points off for every time somebody uses a logical fallacy in their argument?

 

[All Else Failed]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Idk guys, it might be unfair to the team I'm not on.

 

[debbie t]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Idk guys, it might be unfair to the team I'm not on.

:24::24::24::24::24: i love you AEF

 

[All Else Failed]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

<3333

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

i think that would be excellent .
i like the idea that you may have to bebate for something you personnaly are against
i like that you may be on a team with people you usually disagree with ,so have to cooperate
i just like it
also debates cannot go off at tangents in real scenarios or you get disqualified.

CB stands for clever bugger:24:..

Thanks. Yes I think the advantages are numerous bearing the points you mentioned.------>Plus there are no hard feelings because of how it works.

 

[debbie t]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Thanks. Yes I think the advantages are numerous bearing the points you mentioned.------>Plus there are no hard feelings because of how it works.

does each team get a go at making a point or do they have a captain where points are sent and then the debate is presented complete at the end??

and i suppose wed have to draw straws to see who gets AEF:24:

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Would we get to take points off for every time somebody uses a logical fallacy in their argument?

No real point deductions or stuff like that. Debates run its course as usual. All's fair.

Idk guys, it might be unfair to the team I'm not on.

LOL AEF :24:
Tru dat.

 

[gLing]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

does each team get a go at making a point or do they have a captain where points are sent and then the debate is presented complete at the end??

and i suppose wed have to draw straws to see who gets AEF:24:

God no, he would sink any team he is on in the first round. :eek

 

[debbie t]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

God no, he would sink any team he is on in the first round. :eek

thats why we haver to draw straws :24:

oh dear all of this will have to be moved elsewhere.

 

[Ria]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Just thought about this as I saw your post.

You know what might be a good idea?

What if like how they have a debating competition...where they have 2 sides: 1 for......1 against.

The OTz Debating (insert name here). Here's how it could work:

For our members who are keen on debating (and we have a few ), 2 sides are drawn up from a list of interested members (AEF of course, Badboy, Intruder, Dodge, Pudding, Tim, SRC, gLing, Debs etc etc).......prolly let's say each side consists of 5 people.

A subject for debating is determined beforehand (giving time for research).
Debating begins and each side puts forward their arguments "For" or "Against" depending on which one assigned.

This could be a monthly or bi-monthly exercise (or whatever).
The nice thing about this is would allow the debators to think outside the box to present ideas and opinions on any given subject apart from their own personal beliefs.

I would go to that show. I wonder if anyone else thinks this is a good idea? I would love to see that.

Count me in too, if OK with you guys?

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

does each team get a go at making a point or do they have a captain where points are sent and then the debate is presented complete at the end??

and i suppose wed have to draw straws to see who gets AEF:24:

The only difference would have an established position (For or Against) assigned before the debate to put forward the arguments. Debating is fluent after that as usual. No restrictions to complicate. Anyone of the team can interject at any given time and according to convenience.

As for AEF, well of course he is the star of the show.

 

[debbie t]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Count me in too, if OK with you guys?

of course ,well have a chance of having some of it in real english with you and i and peter there:24:

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Count me in too, if OK with you guys?

Of course. Open to all interested members who'd like to have a go.

Depending on the amount of interested persons we could have one thread with one subject for those 2 teams and another thread with another subject for another team debate simultaneously.

 

[Ria]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

of course ,well have a chance of having some of it in real english with you and i and peter there:24:

LOL, Deb.

Don't forget Juggles and Sky if they choose to join a team too. However, it doesn't have to be English against whichever other countries does it? Mix and match I reckon, is that right?

 

[Ria]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Of course. Open to all interested members who'd like to have a go.

Depending on the amount of interested persons we could have one thread with one subject for those 2 teams and another thread with another subject for another team debate simultaneously.

Great! Whichever way you decide.

So, does this mean that you are doing all the sorting out then, or who is?

 

[debbie t]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

LOL, Deb.

Don't forget Juggles and Sky if they choose to join a team too. However, it doesn't have to be English against whichever other countries does it? Mix and match I reckon, is that right?

no not at all it, would be boring ..i meant at least well have colour spelled correctly

 

[Pudding Time]

Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

This sounds like fun, though I wouldn't be interested in it unless I'm joined by other with similar beliefs as me. IMO, there a good chance that I could end up with a whole group that hardly shares the same beliefs. This could be really frustrating, since they could just keep throwing my input out as it doesn't coincide with their input.

If I was in the same group as Intruder, I might as well go beat my head against the wall..