There should be an optional Cross-Ex round on DDO
Debate Rounds (4)
First round -- acceptance
Second round -- 1ac/nc
Third round -- rebuttal
Fourth round -- closing statements
optional -- Available for usage in a debate; not mandatory
cross-ex -- Time when you can ask your opponent questions. They can be any type of question.
DDO -- debate.org
For the sake of this argument, assume time is a standard two minutes.
Cross-examinations can be placed in either after each speech (Pro speaks, con CX's for 2 minutes, then con speaks, Pro CX's for 2 minutes) or after both (Pro speaks, con speaks, con CX's Pro, Pro CX's Con).
Assume that both pro and con must be online in order for a cross-ex to take place. Therefore, the two must agree on a time and must click a button such as "Ready to CX." Once this button is clicked, a data point is logged stating that the user is ready. This will expire after two minutes in order to prevent on party from starting a CX when the other is not ready.
I would love a cross-ex option regardless of the outcome of this debate and hopefully others feel the same way (even if you're going con! :P)
I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
Contention 1: Cross-Ex allows a true test of knowledge
Cross-examination demonstrates a more true understanding of debate and further defines elite and novice debaters. The goal of a debate is to prove that you have a deeper understanding of the topic by proving that your case is the favorable one. Cross-examination allows the opposite party to truly test the extent of your knowledge by asking pertinent questions. Additionally, it tests the knowledge of the questioner. For example, if you are debating a topic such as:
"Resolved: Iran poses a bigger threat to the U.S. than North Korea"
An essential part of the PRO's side would be a deep understanding of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's past actions and threats related to closing the strait, and the economic consequences of our oil dependency on Saudi Arabia. This may not truly be expressed in a speech, which is where the Cross-Ex comes into place.
Anyone can regurgitate information, rephrase it, and post it on DDO. Not everyone can truly understand it. Cross-ex allows to test the true knowledge of a subject, something that is essential for full debates.
Contention 2: Cross-Ex increases excitement
Cross-examinations happen quickly and allow for quick changes of pace. It allows one speaker to gain a 1-up on the other. I previously touched on this during my first contention, but I will expand this to the spectator sport. Public Forum Debate was invented as a spectator sport alternative to Policy debate.
Public Forum has larger cross-examination periods (crossfires) and has a larger presence in circuits such as the NJFL. Public Forum can be exciting with pertinent questions. However, it also shows the competency of the question-asker when questions such as the perhaps cliche: "Can you tell me about the time when you said those things?" questions.
I was cross-examining a member from my school's speech team, and I began to bombard him with questions. We were debating the relevancy of oil to the American energy crisis. He stated that we need to rely on the Middle East, and I contended that Canada was an important ally. I sarcastically asked him, "Is Canada an important part of the Middle East?" and in the heat of the moment, he said "Yes." I then went on to mention the Keystone XL pipeline, which he stated carries oil.
Heat of the moment questions like these add tension to debate. After all, debate isn't the "most-friendly" club. Slip-of-the-tongue answers add excitement to debates.
Contention 3: Cross-Ex makes debates more realistic
Saturday Night Live criticized the Presidential Debates between President Barack Obama and Presidential-Elect Mitt Romney, featuring both characters with lines such as "I never said that." This happened in real life too, although it was not as funny as the SNL version.
This happens in every debate, which is why DDO adding it would only make sense. It makes these online debates more like the real-life famous debates that we see on television.
For these three reasons, I strongly urge a >>Pro<< ballot.
You see, I don,t think you read what I wrote.I am just going to be honest with you, I don't have much point but what I said is true and always will. We don't need it, period.
For some reason I would never agree with you.
You see, I don,t think you read what I wrote.
The arguments were ignored because it did not stick to format.
I am just going to be honest with you, I don't have much point but what I said is true and always will. We don't need it, period.
The initial resolution and understandings page sets forth the precedent that the CX will be optional...therefore, nobody is forced to use it.
All of my arguments from the previous round are extended since my opponent failed to refute my arguments.
1) it shows knowledge of the topic
2) it makes debates more realistic
3) it adds excitement to debates and encourages voters
For these three reasons, I strongly urge a PRO ballot. (7 pt. win)
And for that reason you should vote for me.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Gondun 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: It is clear who put the most effort into this debate. Pro was the only one with arguments, so he gets arguments. I'm also giving him conduct because Con pretty much just said we have different opinions so I win.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.