Participants Needed! First ATS Debate Tournament for 2007

My hats off to all involved. The level of debate we are witnessing here is almost scary. Whatever the topic, whatever the position, our members are making one helluva case for their position.

Very impressive.

Results will be announced by Monday at the latest. Just under half of the judges have spoken so far.

I am most excited to see what you can pull out of the hat as the last debate...

Results should have been posted today, but there's been a development.

The results were fairly consistent for the first half of the judging, and it looked like each debate might reach a majority opinion before all judges had reported.

That has not happened so far though, and theoretically, the count could still swing in either debate. We will have to chew our fingernails just a little bit longer while we await the results from the remaining judges.

I assure you that results will be announced on the same day that the pannels have reached majority opinions.

I hate to keep you guys waiting, but it does say something for the outstanding effort that all contenders have put forward.

Well, I do love a nail biter.

As do I. I must admit I am very excited to see the final of this tournament. I know it's going to be amazing.

It also means we're closer to being able to get another tournament going!

How about a tag team debate like a skins match in golf? trade off posts...c'mon, where are the results...you are killing us

I'm conferring with a trusted friend and advisor as to how to proceed since some of our judges appear as though they may have more urgent business to attend to. Hang tough guys.

One way or another, I'll soon be removing the title from my avatar and announcing the beginning of the championship round.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I'm conferring with a trusted friend and advisor as to how to proceed...

Grab some fresh judges if you need to. It's all good just so long as you don't yell: "Do over!".

Originally posted by esdad71
How about a tag team debate like a skins match in golf? trade off posts...c'mon, where are the results...you are killing us

I actually think this is an excellent idea. A pairs debate match..sounds like a blast.

You could randomly pair debaters, or allow them to chose partners, and then follow the normal debate protocol. Although instead of 3 alternating posts, you might have 4 so that each debater has an even number of replies. I think that would be a ton of fun.

Something to consider anyway.

Ok. I'll belatedly bite.

Although I should know better than to volunteer to be involved with anyone who posts seemingly harmless proposals at 4:21 A.M.

Nothing personal you understand, but I have learned, sometimes rather painfully, that innocent ideas offered before 5:00 have downsides.

Partially because, without exception, alcohol was somehow involved. All too often, those downsides were too horrible to even contemplate, let alone describe.

Also, I am concerned about the 6,800 word maximum limitation. Why not 6,850, or even 6,853 words ?

Seriously, I suggest if you are to limit the total number of words you should also limit the number of words in a response. Primarily to keep clowns like me from posting 6,215-words in the first response, thereby devastating all opportunity for effective rebuttal.

Sort of like a chess game with three moves to check. Or parking spot hogs, who cleverly maneuver so as to occupy three prime spaces with a Honda Civic.

An additional benefit: In my experience, word count limitations are one of the best ways to hone writing skills. A sterling example, from personal experience: Explain why American forces should be brought home from Iraq. Lots of (prolific) writers can explain why in 22,000 words or less. Explaining this in 450 words or less is a much more difficult task.

If this program is still on or being considered, count me in. I love blood-free jostling. Especially when pennants are offered to winners. I am assuming the pennant will be alcohol-soaked and squeezable, since this proposal was made before 5:00 AM.

azchuck

azchuck:
I take it that you have misunderstood. Word limits per post have always existed. Total limits were calculated to let prospective judges know what they were getting into.
The old limits were 4 posts of 800 words and one post of 500 words to close, times two participants, equals 7,400 words. (I mistakenly recalled openings statements also being limited to 500 words, so I arrived at a number 600 words too low, 6800).

That system was replaced at the outset of this tournament. Now posts are limited to 5500 characters, or 3500 in the case of closing statements.


Anyhow, we'll be sure to notify you when signups begin for the next tournament. Signups for the next one will probably be in mid-late October, with the tournament beginning in Early November and running into mid December (don't worry, we will take Thanksgiving weekend off and if we don't finish before Christmas, which we should, we will take a break then too).

I know in each and every one of the posts submitted to the debates, The Vagabond is thanked for his efforts, but I still don't think people understand the amount of work that goes into running these debates. From gathering members, subjects, judges, etc., it really can consume several hours, if not more. Then once it is up and running, the day to day upkeep is very time consuming. Being a Moderator alone is very time consuming, let alone taking on this initiative.

And here he is saying that we're going to have one in a few more weeks.

In the past they were almost annually!

So while this isn't what he is looking for, and will probably kick me in the arse for, I want to take a moment to thank V for his efforts here, and allowing our members an opportunity to hone their abilities.

I know all of you are grateful for what he has done, but the man truly deserves a pat on the back, and then some.

To the competitors, good luck one last time. Looking forward to see who is gonna throw down in the finals.

Thanks for the kind words Chissler.

I love the debate forum and I'd like to get it back to a 3 tournaments a year pace. I think these things can really bring out the best in good posters a lot of the time



As for judging, here's the deal guys. Originally there were to be 7 judges. Both debates are currently scored 3-1, and 3 judges have not had time to respond. I gave it all the time I could because there was a faint hope for the trailing debaters, but at this point, I think it's time to count our unresponsive judges as abstaining and put this show back on the road.

I deeply regret that this round has not gone off precisely according to plan, but I feel the odds that the outcome has been affected are relatively slim.

The winners in this round are Justin Oldham and Semper Fortis. Official announcements will follow shortly, along with the final round debate topic. All of that should be up by 10pm pacific.


Finally, for those of you who are interested in the debates but did not sign up for this tournament in time, I will be compiling a list based on posts to this thread sometime before monday, and using that to create a U2U list which will be used to notify you of signups for future events, and also to help you arrange challenge matches.

Congratulations, Justin and Semper!

Or, should that be condolences?? Can't wait to see what's in store for you in the championship round.

TS, Fine debate on your part my friend....

EsDad, you really put me to the ropes....

Now for the final....

(I think I'm in trouble)


Semper

For those who haven't seen it the final debate topic is........
"The Primary Reason for the Illegality of Marijuana and Strict Enforcement thereof is that Marijuana is harmful to individuals and to society".

How in the world does this topic not break the T&C ?
Surely somebody isnt going to say that I cant discuss the legalization of Marijuana but its OK to debate if Marijuana is harmful. By the standards that have been set recently the topic shouldn't be permitted on ATS.

You can discuss the rationale for the legalization of marijuana, you just can't discuss your own personal usage. Debating the law is fine. Discussion of laws broken ain't so fine.

Reading the resolution, I can see a few ways that each debater can frame the argument. Good luck to Semper and Justin. May the best debater win!

Originally posted by Tuning Spork
You can discuss the rationale for the legalization of marijuana, you just can't discuss your own personal usage. Debating the law is fine. Discussion of laws broken ain't so fine.

That would be fine if that was still the case if you read this post you will understand where I am coming from.
Here is the related thread .

IMO at best the topic is walking on a tightrope .

[edit on 13-9-2007 by xpert11]

Has it started?

Did i win??

Can I still enter pls??//??

Seriously, I think this sounds like a lot of fun.