Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'overview'.
Found 3 results
I am at a national tournament and many judges voted for the other team because of their preferences and biases, however, I'm not complaining. One judge said that she voted Affirmative even though they dropped and conceded and didn't explain many arguments, and my coach said that coming out of the last rebuttal we need to articulate why the judge should vote for us. Can you please help me formulate an overview of why I, as the Affirmative, would win using my advantages? I will give credit where it is due, thank you! I'm running the Dream Act
Hello, my name is Allen Easley, and I suck at my 2N overviews. I find them being ineffective and a time suck to my speech. If you have any general tip for the construct of my overviews that would be fantabular. Also, If you have any general tips that would be radical. Thanks y'all. *Notice the non-gendered usage of y'all? Yep, I am not sexist at all.
I don't think I mean roadmapping -- I've been hearing this word used in ways that don't seem to refer to roadmapping. Here is the thing I read that triggered this question: "A positional take out is just an argument that you can make that can be used generally to sever the affirmatives' ability to link their offense back to their criterion, or generate offense in any other manner. One example of a positional take out is an overview on the contention. These can be devastating because people often just ignore them." Maybe the author still means roadmapping when he says "overview"? ...but if he does, then the above quote makes no sense to me. Any help is appreciated. Thank you!