Debating Society

Comes second:
http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/
a ''Debate Video'' website or blog as a part of the DEBATE CENTRAL http://debate.uvm.edu/
They have a bundle of debating related videos about debates (certainly) including lectures, discussions, speeches and something else I dunno.
Have FUN and RELAX.

And and and ... comes the third one which should be the last today.
http://www.uvm.edu/%7Edebate/watch/?M=D
One hundred or more Videos from the World Debate Institute at the University of Vermont of United States of America.
Easy 2 download but hard 2 go through.

see you next Friday!

This is a very cool club indeed.
I think I will ask you guys to join the club next summer, when my schedule has fully been cleared up.

Hi!
Check it throughout your cold cold nights.
A number of articles and publications - coming from The Wales Debating Federation.
http://www.walesdebate.org.uk/dsp_DebatingPubs.cfm?Page=Pubs
Good day.

3-on-3 Debating Tutorial
Speaker Roles
First Speakers
First Affirmative Speakers Definition. You should explain what the key terms mean, this may require you to set the debate if the definition has more than one meaning or is not clear. Be careful not to define truistically which is where you leave the other team arguing the unarguable like hunger is good. Your definition must be reasonable which means it should not be obscure; it could relate to issues in the media at the time. Team summary (case split). Where you allocate the arguments between you and your second speaker; it is important so that you can develop your case without being repetitive and so the audience can see where your going Case. Now is the time to develop your argument. Divide this area into a couple of points and carefully signpost your matter. Argue by issue, not example and at the end, briefly recap and state how the next speaker will build. First Negative Speakers Definitional issues. State whether you accept of reject your opponentsâ?T definition. If you accept then move onto rebuttal. You may reject the affirmative''s definition if it is truistic (self-proving; irrebuttable). Remember that if you accuse a team of a truism, you must not be able to rebut them. You may also reject if you believe your definition is more reasonable you must state the difference, why yours is better and why your opponents is not as good. If your opponent gives a perfectly reasonable definition that you did not anticipate then try not to challenge, as it is messy. You must refute! Critique you opponent''s arguments. Do it in a structured way maybe dividing it into two or three main themes and carefully signposting your way. Be careful not to rebut the examples but the issues. Team summary (case split). Same as for the affirmative. Case. Develop like affirmative.

Second Speakers
Affirmative SpeakersSummarise. Briefly summarise what has happened in the debate and how your speech will build on the first speaker''s speech in order to prove the team line. This should be very brief.
You must refute! Rebut the main arguments of your opponents. Good rebuttal should not come in the form of a list where the longest list wins. Rather, good rebuttal should simplify your opponent''s case into a few central issues which you can then attack. When rebutting, you should first deal with any definitional issues that may have arisen. Also remember to use examples *****pport your counter arguments. Case. Once you have rebutted, you should then spend your time putting forward the substantive arguments of your team, as this is your main role. These arguments should be signposted and they should, in turn, be discussed in depth. The concept of discussing in depth is not as daunting as it seems; it can be likened to writing essays where you write in paragraphs, not sentences. So too in debating, your matter should be ''in paragraphs'' where you state your premise, explain the premise and then support that premise with examples. After that, a good essay writer and debater will summarise. Summarise. Recap what you have said to make it clear that both you and your first speaker have been building a case.
Negative Speakers Summarise. As stated before, make sure that you contrast the developments of each case and briefly state how you plan to continue that development. You must refute! This should follow the structure of the second affirmative. However, remember that since there have been two preceding affirmative speeches, you will have considerably more to rebut and thus rebuttal will need to be more comprehensive. Summarise your speech and the case of your team, trying to put the speech into an overall context by looking also at the approach of your opponents. However this contrast need only be brief, as you will have dealt with the main issues of your opponent in rebuttal. Case. Now you must put forward your substantive material. Again, do all the good matter and method things: keep relevant, structure logically (in paragraph form as mentioned just to the left), carefully signpost all of your arguments and support all of your arguments with examples, or at least whenever you can. Summarise. Summarise your speech and the case of your team, trying to put the speech into an overall context by looking also at the approach of your opponents. However this contrast need only be brief as you will have dealt with the main issues of your opponent in rebuttal.

Third SpeakersThird Affirmative Speakers Summarise. Highlight the main themes of each side and show the contrast. Number these main themes so you can substantively rebut your opponent next. You must Refute! You should spend 80-90 percent of your speech doing this. You should pick a few main themes to rebut - your opponents may have already set these up in their own split and allocation. This allows you to rebut thematically rather than move from one inconclusive example to another. Just as you put forward your arguments in paragraphs not sentences, do the same for your rebuttal. Keep signposting! You should not really have time to worry about new material. Summarise and conclude. Recap the main themes of the debate, after your substantial rebuttal, you should be able to contrast team lines confidently highlighting how your case is superior. Third Negative Speakers Summarise. Highlight the main themes of each side and show the contrast. Number these main themes so you can substantively rebut your opponent next. You must refute! You should spend 80-90 percent of your time rebutting. Again, like mentioned for 3rd aff., you should highlight and rebut main themes as opposed to multiple examples - remember that when the issue underlying the example falls, so does the example but not necessarily vice-versa. Under no circumstances can a third negative speaker introduce new material but if it is a new example to clarify a previously put theory or rebuttal of material then this will NOT be considered new material. Summarise and conclude. Again, go over the main themes, comparing and contrasting. Though you have last say, you need not yell to be convincing. Be clear and concise and identify the important issues.

DefinitionsThe 1st Affirmative speaker introduces the motion and defines the key terms in the motion. This definition is intended to limit the scope of the debate to a specific and focused area. The 1st Affirmative then goes on to state the stand of the Affirmative, and presents the strategy, or theme line, that the team will use in order to justify this stand. Definitions should be reasonable, clear and true to the spirit of the motion. Truistic, tautological and circular definitions are strictly prohibited. Squirreling (definitions that are in no way related to the spirit of the motion) and time/place setting are also not allowed. The Negative team must not just oppose the motion, but also build a counter-case against the Affirmative team. In the event that the Negative feels that the definition is invalid, the 1st Negative speaker may challenge the Affirmativê?Ts definition and propose an alternative definition. However, the Negative cannot raise a definitional challenge simply on the basis that their definition is more reasonable.

Team Lines
This is a short phrase or sentence that focuses the arguments of your team. It should be a uniting point that can be repeated, not word for word, but the gist of it. This should underline the approach your team is taking to the debate. Your team should use this team line consistently.
Some of the best rebuttal you can do is to directly attack the team line used by your opponents. Say something like: "the basis of our opponents case has been... this is flawed because of these reasons..."