- 3
- 127 427
Kevin Klyman
Приєднався 21 вер 2014
My goal is to post as many good Public Forum debate rounds online as possible. There are hundreds of Policy and Lincoln-Douglas rounds online for young debaters to learn from, and the young Public Forum community should follow this example. I try my best to record good rounds that I see but I would love help. If you have PF rounds recorded, let me know! Alternatively, the next time you anticipate seeing or participating in a good round, record it! I hope that the videos on this channel are educational and entertaining. Let me know if you have any questions or feedback.
Tournament of Champions 2016 Public Forum Semifinals
This round was between Mission San Jose KW and Hawken EL. The team on the right is Mission San Jose and the team on the left is Hawken. The topic is Resolved: To alleviate income inequality in the United States, increased spending on public infrastructure should be prioritized over increased spending on means-tested welfare programs. Mission San Jose is the negative, Hawken is the affirmative. MSJ wins on a 3-0. There is a break in the video at 28:55 but only a second is missing. Here is the tournament's PF bracket: www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/results/bracket.mhtml?tourn_id=5019&result_id=24745
Переглядів: 28 218
Відео
Harvard 2015 Semifinals Public Forum Debate
Переглядів 4,2 тис.9 років тому
The round is between Evanston KS and Walt Whitman AA. The resolution is on balance, economic globalization benefits worldwide poverty reduction. Evanston speaks first on the pro, Walt Whitman speaks second on the con. The decision was a 4-1 for Walt Whitman AA. Sorry if the audio isn't great, I adjusted it so that there is less background noise and greater volume. The grand crossfire is especia...
Harvard 2015 Public Forum Debate Round Robin Finals
Переглядів 95 тис.9 років тому
The round is between Princeton MO and Plano West HF. The team on the left is Princeton and the team on the right is Plano. The resolution is Resolved: On balance, economic globalization benefits worldwide poverty reduction. Princeton MO is on the pro, and Plano HF is on the con. The decision was a 4-1 for Princeton MO.
These are two great schools and teams!
homework be like
I'm scared of the Princeton guy
Rip right side
I wish women weren’t always the first speaker when they have a male partner.
that matt feng guy sucks
35:58 What?
This is just card packing bullshit, not really debate. Might as well just have the judge read their cases, and see which one has the most cards and best quality cards.
no
Yes no maybe so.
@@CapsFan117 heh have you ever seen a round of policy?
this is lay compared to what pofo looks like today lmao.
@@samchitgopekar8530 this is lay compared to what pofo looks like today lmao.
MSJ layin da pipe.
26:19, my favorite moment so far
LOL
Lol whenever I hear someone spread I just stop taking notes no reason to put your brain thrue such torture
If you call this spreading no reason to care about your opinion
Oh my god! I didn't like this debate! They didn't follow the steps or protocol to debate. So I was confused at the end why the PM talked first instead of talking the LO. That was supposed to be the rebuttal time. Also, why they didn't ask questions during the debate, and they waited to ask questions at the end of the rounds?? That was a totally mess! Also, they were reading the papers a lot, and seemed to be awkward
uhh this is pf
This isn't a parli debate -- this was a Public Forum round; questions are asked after in a cross-examination period.
left side chill pls
Repping the CFL!!
these are not good debaters. 70% of the time they read off their paper, a good debater is one which is able to argue naturally
what does that comment even mean
"reading off the paper" right, thats where they take the NOTES on opponent's case. You try a pf round without flowing. Let's see the results of "a good debater"
They are reading off their flows, and they are reading cases. You try memorizing a constructive and an entire debate round.
They're reading off their flows. You must be pretty stupid. And their first speech is a constructive.. impossible to memorize.
That's not true.
is it me or the one on the right (your left) just can't seem to shut up for 1 sec…
i miss the days of aff/neg and using actual folders/pads to flow. aging myself here.
what lmao. terminology is part of literally every activity
people still use pads to flow. The computers are for evidence
Policy Debate and LD Debate still use aff/neg and paper to flow, PF is a newish (the last 20-25 years) format specifically to push back against the speed/jargon and longer format of policy and encourage a quick on ramp to participate and ajudication by a community/parent judge and that introduced the terms Pro/Con.
I wish they could all talk slower, or at least in a better flow, because it's very difficult to connect with an audience if they have to do mental gymnastics in order to understand what the speaker is saying. It's also frustrating because I want to be able to absorb everything, and I know that fast flow denotes intelligence as well as they're ability to compound a lot of information on top of itself therefor they succumb, but come on people. Let's pretend you're talking at a bar full of real people (absurd notion right?) and then try to explain a point. I bet that would be fun to watch =D
+Tom Walsh This is incredibly slow. Watch some policy rounds.
Oh silly me, I thought in order to make a point it has to be understood =D Just because you can speak quickly does not denote intelligence or a good argument that's my point, and the more people can understand you, the more you can persuade them of your ideas (in the real world scenario, not this bubble of debate).
+Tom Walsh Policy judges are trained to understand the speed at debaters talk at. By talking slower all you are saying is you want to make less arguments. Policy debate is not meant to be understand by everyone.
Now that sounds quite pandering =D trust me, I talk quite fast, with about as much wit as to astound even myself =D
+Ben Kosko Don't know if this is a different version of public form debate than I'm used to, but what I was told when I signed up to judge was that the object of the debate is to convince the common people your position is correct (hence "public"). Many participants also spoke rapid fire, and it was difficult to keep up with all the arguments. Instead of developing several key points well, they often threw out the whole kitchen sink so to speak, which muddled their effectiveness. I've done this internationally, so again, it may be different. Also, what's a policy judge? Just the judge adjudicating the round, or is it some special kind of judge?
Grand CX is so pointless. I just work on final focus during that time...
+John S well, its a great way to answer points brought up in summary, and to get more points in before your final focus, as long as you do it in the right way.
+Lorr S do you write the final focus before or during the debate?
Kevin DoesRandomStuff Always during. I find it really annoying when people read pre-written final focuses. Most of the time I tell my partner what to write in summary, and then I just use that as my basis for final and work with that
I also am having a problem and I hope you can help me resolve it. Usually attacks have the contention of your opponent's case and what it says. My friends all figure that out without any prep time. Can you give me some advice on what I have to do?
Kevin DoesRandomStuff Most of the time, preping a topic will help build an understanding of A LOT of arguments, which will help. Otherwise, just extend your partners rebuttal. A tip that I like to do in summaries is bring up new evidence and cards saying new things like statistics. They can easily remain till the end of the round. Biggest thing though, is do not forget about things, as most of the time it will result in you dropping the argument unintentionally
which side is harvard and which side is princeton
The other is actually Plano. They simply compete at Harvard
+LiftMeUp1990 That's where the tournament is
no one's paying a attention
Your mom doesn't pay attention to you HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH
Rated Rentz silly goose
Oh God! I hated this topic, every time I gave a rebuttal, I always felt like I was doing it wrong. Still won tournaments though...
1v1 me in debate fool, street rulez
Wait I have a question, do you actually state the dates of your evidence directly in your case?
+sandeep “Houdini” mishra you don't really have to, typically that is better done in a2's but doing it isn't' a bad thing
of course
No, but most debaters do it and most judges appreciate it when you do
What does pro and con mean?
+Kourtney_Harper Pro is the team that argues that economic globalization benefits worldwide poverty reduction whereas con is the team that argues that economic globalization does not benefit worldwide poverty reduction.
+Kevin Klyman thank you. They just made a debate team at my high school and I wanted to tryout, but I didn't know anything about it. so I'm watching UA-cam videos on debate!
Wow. I do debate and this was my homework and I learned something.
I hate aggressive debators. The second speaker for Princeton was so good, but he was just way too angry while speaking. It's unnecessary and just adds uncomfortable tension to the debate.
agreed. if this were prelims and i were judging him, i would have penalized him in terms of speaker points. what a jackass.
Sinan Ozbay He doesn't even wear a jacket. What kind of debate does he think he is having? There is a reason public forum was created: to stay away from the slobbering hoodies endemic to policy debate. He is ruining the event for me and for everyone else in it.
***** I don't think it's physically possible for me to agree more with you. He is to Public Forum as Church is to State--the two must be kept separated. He single handedly turned this event into policy over the course of 40 minutes and needs to be burned in effigy--down with him!
Sinan Ozbay Our souls are sexually intertwined. The revolution must be swift and ruthless. We will eliminate all aggressive debaters from the event, leaving only the polite to rule the circuit, and later, the world. Our first target: Sinan Ozbay.
hellobr00klynx3 being aggressive is a tactic to A. get your point across B. seem like you know what you're talking about and C. intimidate the opponent this guy may have gone a little too far but only during the crossfire being aggressive isn't a bad thing
Kevin <3
Who won this round?
Princeton MO is on the pro
Harvard was a mess this year.
Sinan and Pragya FTW