Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

A New way to Debate!

Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2009 8:57:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
---Some of the older members may remember me trying to start a type of debate known as CBA debate. Well it didn't take long before I realized it was exactly like Policy Debate. Well the way I re-created it made it more simple, and a little more unique. It's still like Policy, but it's a different way to do it and it has a refurnished format. Anyway I wanted to start this thread before beginning the first debate, then to get it really going I will have a tournament. Remember, this is in early creations, I am VERY open to suggestions and this is really ours to make whatever we want it to.

==================================

The first thing you need to know is that CBA Debate stands for Cost/Benefit Analysis Debate.

FORMAT:

ROUND 1: Benefits (state your stance benefits)
ROUND 2: Costs (state your opponents costs)
ROUND 3: Rebuttals
ROUND 4: Rebuttals
ROUND 5: Summary

TOPICS:

---I must admit that I had fun coming up with these topics. One of the things I like most about CBA Debate as it is right now is that the topics give an explanation of what is going on, then the specific stances that both sides must support/defend. Some of these are out there, but this form of debate could easily support more straight forward topics. This kind of debate could also easily support more than 2 sides (for example if there was more than just 2 stances), but for DDO it will still remain 1 v 1.

==========

Scenario: Planet Earth is expecting imminent doom as an asteroid five times the size of North America is on a crash course. Impact is due 90 days from now and as of right now the public has no knowledge of their soon to come doom. The few informed experts agree that there is no avoiding complete destruction since the size of the asteroid is so enormous. What is the most net-beneficial option that receives the highest quality of life for the remaining 3 months for Planet Earth?

PRO: Inform the public of imminent doom no sooner than 2 weeks from impact.
CON: Inform the public of imminent doom no later than 2 months from impact.

==========

Scenario: The United Nations have finally obtained power and demand that all nations combine into a singular nation. Failure to join will result in trade embargoes with the rest of the world and will be an enemy of the remainder of Earth. Every other nation has agreed to sign on to the open trading and a universal treaty. "Country X" (for convenience shall be referred to as Sparta) has the strongest military in the world and the most advanced nuclear and biological arsenals in the world. There is not a nuclear or biological weapon that Sparta does not own in multiple supplies. What is the most net-beneficial option for Sparta?

PRO: Complete the objective for world peace and join the United Nations.
CON: Initiate World War III with, Objective A: Enslave a necessary percentage of the population of the world to make Sparta have the highest quality of life to date, and, Objective B: Kill all unnecessary humans.

===========

Scenario: The Unlawful Internet Gambling Act of 2006 was passed by America as an attempt by politicians to gain moral ground with voters. What is the most net-beneficial option for American citizens?

PRO: Begin enforcement of the act and bring an end to Internet gambling.
CON: Legalize all forms of online gambling.

---The topics wording could use some work, but it's a start.

HOW TO...

-If there was anything that needed work it would be how it was to actually be done (case format). As of right now I think there needs to be a few practice rounds then we can work with it. I didn't spend too much time on this but here is what I have so far:

*How to create a "Benefits" Case.

INTRO: Refer to the general outlay of the "Scenario" and your answer to obtain the most net-beneficial solution.

SPECIFICS: Although you are restricted to a general way to address the "Scenario" you are not restricted to how you are going to do it. For example, you may be given the solution to "legalize all forms of gambling online". Therefore you give the following specifics:

A. Outlaw all foreign and domestic online gambling sites.

B. Establish a government run gambling site.

C. All players on this site will be tax exempt (since the government gets direct profits).

---I would recommend being more specific such as budgets for employees, advertising, allowing other countries to play, etc. You could also go in an entirely different direction with the following specifics:

A. Require all gambling sites to submit to regulation from the United States Federal Government.

B. Tax all U.S. deposits onto gambling sites 5%.

C. Tax all U.S. withdraws from gambling sites 5%.

BENEFITS: After going into "Specifics", you final reach the benefits. These are fairly basic as long as they relate to something that you do in your specifics. For example, you are not allowed to claim a benefit that you already are getting. However if you lose a benefit already achieved right now (if the judge agrees with your opponent), then that should wait until "costs".

In costs, there are a various amount of ways to try to bring down your opponent. I think this is going to need a lot of trial and error.

Rebuttals are basic arguing against what your opponent said, and summary is where you take everything argued, and YOU compare it (it's the Analysis in CBA).

Thoughts? Questions? Anyone wanting to give it a try right now?
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2009 9:05:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I like this idea. I'd be interested in taking:

CON: Legalize all forms of online gambling.

However, your scenario about the end of the earth seems tempting too lol. I really don't have an opinion on it at all, so it might be fun to debate something random like that just for the hell of it. I'll think of what side I might like and get back to you...?
President of DDO
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2009 9:09:12 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
sounds good. I think I can take either side in any of these topics except for the one where online gambling isn't legalized... lol
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2009 6:30:17 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Sounds intriguing; I'd like to try it sometime.

This format would probably work best if you individually challenged people you know will abide by the format, rather than opening a challenge to the public.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
CommanderTaco
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2009 8:52:06 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
This sounds really fun, but I would need a practice debate in this format first because I am a little confused, but I am willing to give this a try and am always open for a challenge.
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2009 7:18:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Also... for use of the debate to soon be in progress.

GUIDELINE: New costs and benefits can be presented through round 3. Responses (ONLY) to these new costs and benefits can be presented in round 4. these can only be used to eliminate the new position, but not further your own.

Also, benefits can be added in round 2, but costs can not be given in round 1.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2009 7:24:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/26/2009 9:05:14 PM, theLwerd wrote:
I like this idea. I'd be interested in taking:

CON: Legalize all forms of online gambling.

However, your scenario about the end of the earth seems tempting too lol. I really don't have an opinion on it at all, so it might be fun to debate something random like that just for the hell of it. I'll think of what side I might like and get back to you...?

Didn't we kind of use a Cost-Benefit model in our debate over the legalization of drugs?
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2010 2:29:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Here is an updated form for a new debate:

The first thing you need to know is that CBA Debate stands for Cost/Benefit Analysis Debate.

=====

TOPIC EXAMPLE:

Scenario: Planet Earth is expecting imminent doom as an asteroid five times the size of North America is on a crash course. Impact is due 90 days from now and as of right now the public has no knowledge of their soon to come doom. The few informed experts agree that there is no avoiding complete destruction since the size of the asteroid is so enormous. What is the most net-beneficial option that receives the highest quality of life for the remaining 3 months for Planet Earth?

PRO: Inform the public of imminent doom no sooner than 2 weeks from impact.
CON: Inform the public of imminent doom no later than 2 months from impact.

=====

FORMAT:

ROUND 1: Benefits (state your stance benefits)
ROUND 2: Costs (state your opponents costs)
ROUND 3: Rebuttals
ROUND 4: Rebuttals/Summary

Round 1 Requirements/Options:

-Option: Resolutional Analysis
-Requirement: Implementation (HOW you are going to complete your burden of the resolution)
-----Your Implementation method can not change throughout the round.
-Requirement: Benefits (How does your implementation method obtain benefits? What sort of benefits does it get? On what scale are these benefits on?)

Round 2 Requirements/Options:

-Option: Additional Benefits
-Requirement: Costs (what sort of negatives does your opponents case present)
-Option: This speech is pretty open. Feel free to argue that your opponent didn't meet their burden, tried to reach beyond their burden to get unreasonable benefits, etc. This is basically the speech as to why the judge should not vote for your opponent.

Round 3

-New costs and benefits can be presented through round 3. Responses (ONLY) to these new costs and benefits can be presented in round 4. these can only be used to eliminate the new position, but not further your own. Costs can not be given in round 1.
-Round 3 is basically arguing what your opponent has done. Also, start comparing the costs and benefits presented by both side.

Round 4

-Final Rebuttal
-Summarize the debate and compare the two cost/benefit ratios and why yours is better.

=====

Feel free to PM me or start your own debate.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2010 2:32:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'd be interested in trying it in this thread. Lwerd, I'd take PRO against you for a test-run of this.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2010 2:37:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/5/2010 2:32:45 PM, wjmelements wrote:
I'd be interested in trying it in this thread. Lwerd, I'd take PRO against you for a test-run of this.

Right now I'm working on a debate. It is over world war III lol. I'm taking the position of starting world war III over joining the UN. If your interested I can direct challenge you when I'm done. Unless you just want to give it a go on a thread to spare your record, or something like that. Either way.