Entry for the first Annual JPP Cup World Championship

WinterBorn said:
Where are the specifics of the competition? Who picks the topics?
Click to expand...
Well we can let the Judges iron out the specifics but the rules would be like this.

The Panel evaluates the 16 players and seeds them 1 to 16. The #1 rated player will be placed against the #16 rated player, #2 vs #15, etc.

The Panel will them make the first 8 pairings based on the rankings. They'll have some lee way to make up for interesting match ups. The Judges will decide the topic to debate and which side of the debate the two opponents must defend. They will give the opponents 24 hours advance knowledge of the topic and then 24 hours to debate the topic.

The judges would then schedule the debates on an every other day basis. That gives one day for two opponents to debate and one day for the judges to evaluate and score that debate. The judges will give out the debate schedule to the opponents but will not tell you what your topic is and which side you defend until 24 hours before your scheduled debate begins.

The debates will be in four parts. An opening statement (200 to 500 words), A rebuttal of the opponents opening statement (200 to 500 words), a question to their opponent and an answer to their opponents question (200 to 500 words).

Scoring for be broken into 3 categories. on a 3 pt must systems for all judged to prevent ties. 1 pt/judge is awarded for the best opening statement, 1pt/judge is awarded for the best rebuttal, and 1 pt/judge is awarded for the best question/answer combo.

Judging Panel to consist of Thorn, Grind and Post Modern Prophet.
 
to the judges... go ahead and rank me #16.... that way no one bitches about getting ranked last out of the gate.

I would also add a suggestion to the rankings...

Once the 16 entrants are determined split them down the middle....

8 liberal (or left of center)
8 conservative (or right of center)

Match them up against each other.... #1 ranked liberal takes on #8 conservative etc....
 
Last edited:
My guess is that Taichi, Zappa and Cypress will avoid this thread like the plague... none wish to face the reality that their debating skills are horrid.

As for others... are Dung and Lorax in this competition yet? They should be.
 
Superfreak said:
to the judges... go ahead and rank me #16.... that way no one bitches about getting ranked last out of the gate.

I would also add a suggestion to the rankings...

Once the 16 entrants are determined split them down the middle....

8 liberal (or left of center)
8 conservative (or right of center)

Match them up against each other.... #1 ranked liberal takes on #8 conservative etc....
Click to expand...

From what Mott said, and what the typical rules for debate say, the subject and which side you defend are chosen for you.

That way the skill of the debater is the issue, not the issue itself.



In fact, if we want this to be a true contest of debating skills, give the conservatives the liberal side to defend and the liberals defend the conservative side.
 
Threedee said:
Fear itself. Besides, if you guys do enter me, I won't take it seriously...
Click to expand...

no worries... if you aren't going to take it seriously, there is no point in having you do it. Though as a youngin... it would do you good to hone your skills. Your choice.
 
WinterBorn said:
From what Mott said, and what the typical rules for debate say, the subject and which side you defend are chosen for you.

That way the skill of the debater is the issue, not the issue itself.



In fact, if we want this to be a true contest of debating skills, give the conservatives the liberal side to defend and the liberals defend the conservative side.
Click to expand...

True... but it would be more entertaining to see a liberal and conservative go toe to toe in all 8 matches. No matter which side of the argument they were assigned.
 
Superfreak said:
My guess is that Taichi, Zappa and Cypress will avoid this thread like the plague... none wish to face the reality that their debating skills are horrid.

As for others... are Dung and Lorax in this competition yet? They should be.
Click to expand...


That's funny...Mr "Op-Ed pieces count as fact" telling me my skillz are horrid...at least I knew Op-ed pieces can't be used in a REAL debate.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
That's funny...Mr "Op-Ed pieces count as fact" telling me my skillz are horrid...at least I knew Op-ed pieces can't be used in a REAL debate.
Click to expand...

The above is a prime example of what I meant by your horrid skills. The ARTICLES quoted EXPERTS in the field. Direct QUOTES CAN be used. You also ignored the research reports given to you... also a sign of poor debating skills. Rather than debate the CONTENT of the reports, you decided to arbitrarily proclaim them unworthy. A bad habit you likely picked up from Cypress.... he who makes wild accusations like 'the University of Delaware doesn't count because no one has heard of them and they are laughable' blah blah blah.

You make excuses for not reading anything that might contradict your preconceived position. You refuse to accept or acknowledge anything that might damage your views of the world.
 
Superfreak said:
The above is a prime example of what I meant by your horrid skills. The ARTICLES quoted EXPERTS in the field. Direct QUOTES CAN be used. You also ignored the research reports given to you... also a sign of poor debating skills. Rather than debate the CONTENT of the reports, you decided to arbitrarily proclaim them unworthy. A bad habit you likely picked up from Cypress.... he who makes wild accusations like 'the University of Delaware doesn't count because no one has heard of them and they are laughable' blah blah blah.

You make excuses for not reading anything that might contradict your preconceived position. You refuse to accept or acknowledge anything that might damage your views of the world.
Click to expand...

why do you let your emotions get the best of you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top