NALSAR I.V. 2012‏

In 2011, for the first time in India, the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad brought British Parliamentary debating to these shores, giving Indian debaters the opportunity to compete in the format used by the World Cup of debating – the World Universities Debating Championships. We didn’t just cater to a need, though; the NALSAR Inter-Varsity Parliamentary Debating Championship (“NALSAR I.V”) boasted an internationally renowned Adjudication Core, comprising Suthen ‘Tate’ Thomas, Iqbal Hafiedz, Clive Eley and Nishita Vasan, Rs. 70,000 (USD 1500) in prize money and a break-night event at Aalankrita, Hyderabad’s finest resort.

We promised an event that would stay on the debate calendar; we continue to deliver on that promise with the Westlaw NALSAR I.V. ’12. From the 5th to the 8th of April, join us in Hyderabad to be a part of the Indian BP debate.

This year’s core yet again brings together the finest in international BP adjudication. It comprises a WUDC Chief Adjudicator – Sharmila Paramanand (CA of the Berlin WUDC ’13), champion of the British I.V. circuit – Harish Natarajan and two national debating stalwarts who have made their mark in BP internationally – Aashay Sahay and Pranay Bhatia. Our prize money is currently set at Rs. 1.5 lakh (USD 3000) and, as with the debate, we expect our break-night event to only get better.

Apart from the dazzle, though, we will deliver a great event because of our core values; last year’s I.V. distinguished itself on two fronts in particular. Our scheduling and tabbing was pin-point – our rounds finished well on time, we even made sure we all watched India lift its first World Cup in 28 years. We also made a strong commitment to hospitality – we appreciate your participation and will go out of our way to make sure that you’re comfortable. Further, the NALSAR I.V. ’11 was easy on participants’ pockets; support from Westlaw and Linklaters means we continue to provide the full accommodation and food package at last year’s registration amount.

Join us as we take forward the Indian debate tradition into the world of British Parliamentary. We look forward to hosting you in Hyderabad in April.

Please keep checking the website (www.nalsariv.wordpress.com) and our Facebook Group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/134897439930337/) for lots more information and updates.

EUDC 2012 Registration TOMORROW

Dear debaters of Europe,

Here are the guidelines for EUDC 2012 Registration:

URL: http://belgradereg.blogspot.com/

So that we have Google's servers to count on for when thousands of people will be clicking refresh every half a second.

START:  Wednesday, February 29, at 12:00 CET:

• London/Dublin/Lisbon at 11:00,
• Belgrade/Paris/Amsterdam/Berlin at 12:00,
• Athens/Ankara/Tallinn at 13:00 and
• Moscow/Doha at 14:00

In the initial phase, registration will be done on an n-1 basis (3 teams / 2 judges or 2 teams / 1 judge, and 1 team / 0 judges):

• Maximum of 3 teams per institution.
• First come first serve basis
• EUDC requirement of 1 team per country is applied.

If your institution would like to seek an n-1 waiver (i.e., not be obliged to send 2 judges for 3 teams / 1 judge for 2 teams etc) if we were able to provide such a facility, please signify that in the relevant question at the end of the form. That question is not required for submitting the form.

At 22:00 CET, a list of all “registered” teams and those on the “waiting list” at that point in time will be announced. We remind you that the team cap is 220. After publishing the list, you will get the phase 2 guidelines (payment details included).

Keep your fingers in shape – [For a picture of the form visit http://belgradereg.blogspot.com/]:

On behalf of the Belgrade EUDC 2012 Organising Committee,

Selena Torlakovic and Marija Simic

Registration Officers

Mykolas Romeris University IV 2012

Hello there fellow debating mates!

Mykolas Romeris University Debate society is very delighted to invite you to the 10th annual international students’ debate tournament “MRU IV 2012″ (before known as “Vilnius Open”) held in Mykolas Romeris university on March 24-25th, 2012 in Vilnius, Lithuania.

Having ten years of experience organizing fabulous debate competitions we will continue to offer the high quality British Parliamentary debates, well-managed organization and the best of all times in one of the most beautiful Northern European capitals – Vilnius.

During the two days you will be able to enjoy five preliminary, semi-final and final rounds, unforgettable parties and a trip around the city‘s most visitable places.

If you can come to the tournament – do! If you can’t – still do! Register now!

Or browse the website for more info-www.mru-debate.eu/mruiv

If you have any questions related to MRU IV 2012 or other similar matters feel free to address them to mruiv2012@gmail.com.

The 7th IIT Delhi Parliamentary Debate

Hey guys,
The English Debating and Literary Club is pleased to invite you to the 7th IIT Delhi Parliamentary Debate to be held from 4th to 7th March, 2012.

What is so special about our debate?
Total Prizes worth Rs 1.5L including prizes for all breaking teams, breaking adjudicators and best speakers. The highest prize money ever given at our debate!
Winners: Rs. 60,000
Runners-up: Rs. 36,000
Semi-finalists: Rs. 18,000 each
Best Speaker: Rs. 6,000
2nd Best Speaker: Rs. 4,000

Best Adju: Rs. 15,000
2nd Best Adju: Rs. 10,000
3rd Best Adju: Rs. 5,000
All breaking Adjus: Rs. 1,000

An awesome Adjudication Core comprising of Shivam Singh (NLS), Shobhit Singhal (IITB), Aamir Zeb (IITD) & Abhilasha Sinha (IITD)
Adjudicator Subsidy for A-level Adjudicators which includes 3AC travel fare, waiving off of reg and acco fees.
Our warm hospitality with free food for one and all including a break night party and accommodation for outstation teams.
Essentials:
Format: 3-on-3 Asians with 5 Prelim rounds and break to Octofinals
Team Cap: 50 teams - max. of 2 teams per institution
Adjudicators Rule: N+1
Registration Form: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHF0cUxMa0daaTVDVnJkZ29WUGRIRGc6MQ
We have nearly reached our team cap. Register your teams and adjudicators by filling the above-mentioned form before 27th February, 2012.
If you wish to avail our Adjudicator Subsidy, reply to this mail with an attached CV outlining your debating experience.

For further queries feel free to mail us at iitdebate@gmail.com or call us at:
Mayank Gupta                                                      Nishit Jain
Secretary, EDLC                                                   Liaison Coordinator, IIT PD
+91-9717617888                                                   +91-9999334226

MMU UADC-FAQ: Granting of team slots and payment of pre-registration‏

Hi all,

We've compiled a list of questions that we’ve received with regards to pre-registration and registration and here are our answers to them.

Q: Is the registration list published anywhere?
A: It’s available here <http://www.mmuuadc2012.org/node/16>.

Q: How were the slots granted to teams, adjudicators and observers?
A: To balance diversity and reward initiative to register early, we used a system of granting two teams to every institution that requested two or more teams and the number requested to those that did not. This was done on a first-come, first-served basis. Even with this policy, several institutions are on the wait-list and have not been allocated any team slots.

The decision to grant two slots per institution was on the basis of the tournament growing in size and the massive expression of interest that we received during pre-registration: over 241 team slots were requested, we’ve granted 121 (excluding the two teams from the host). This is in line with trends that we’ve seen at both the AustralAsian Intervarsity Debating Championships and the World University Debating Championships.

For the adjudicator slots, we allocated only as many as were necessary to meet the N-rule. However, in the case that an institution registered more adjudicators than were required to meet the N-rule we granted them those additional slots. For example, if Institution X registered for 4 teams and 6 adjudicators, they would be granted 2 team and 4 adjudicator slots.

For observers, we granted as many slots as were requested.

Q: Does being granted slots mean I’m guaranteed a place at the UADC?
A: No, it does not.

Those slots will be held for you till March 14th. However, if your institution fails to pay the pre-registration payment of MYR400 per debater or adjudicator and MYR600 before that date, we will release whatever slots that are not paid for in full. Please bear in mind that to pay for a team slot, you will have to pay pre-registration for the 3 debaters and 1 adjudicator i.e. MYR 1200.

Paying the pre-registration payment will hold your slot for you till April 14th by which time you should pay for all your participants in full. Failure to pay registration fees in full by April 14th could either result in the application of the late registration penalty or your unpaid slot being passed on to other institutions.

Q: If my institution hasn’t been granted a team slot (i.e. we are on the waiting list), what should we do?
A: Don’t panic. You still might have an opportunity to get a slot. If institutions that have been granted slots fail to pay their pre-registration sufficiently to hold those slots before the stipulated date of 14th March, we will release the slots and grant them to institutions on the wait list. We will do this on a basis of 1 team (and adjudicator) at a time, moving down a time-sorted list. If you’re on the waiting list, you should be ready to pay pre-registration as soon as possible after you’re informed that you’ve been granted a slot.

Please note that if your institution registered after midnight February 18th, you will not be eligible for a slot under this wait list process. Institutions in this category will be granted slots after all other requests have been exhausted.

Q: My institution requested more than 2 team slots, is there any chance of me getting the additional teams?
A: Yes, there is, but it is contingent upon two factors. First, there will need to be a sufficient number of requested slots that are not paid for before the March 14th deadline such that we can allocate those to
institutions on the wait list. Second, anything left over, will be allocated (one team at a time on a first-come, first-served basis) to institutions that have requested more than 2 teams slots. The further down your institution is on the registration list, the less likely you are to get the additional slots.

Q: If I’m granted slots later, will I need to pay the late registration penalty?
A: The late registration penalty will only apply to institutions that have been allocated slots before March 14th and still have not paid for in full (i.e. MYR 1000 per participant) for them. This is only applicable if we
have chosen to continue to grant your institution those slots; given the demand for slots at the tournament, the more likely outcome is that we will allocate those slots to other institutions.

Q: Can we get an extension on the payment deadlines?
A: All requests for extensions should be communicated directly to the Registration Director at registration@mmuuadc2012.org. Please bear in mind that we will be restrictive in granting extensions due to tournament financial considerations.

If you have any further questions, please direct them to
registration@mmuuadc2012.org.

We’re looking forward to seeing you all in May.

Arisha "Alexx" Arifin*
Convener*
MMU UADC 2012*
convener@mmuuadc2012.org*

Draw for Quater Finals of the Irish Mace

The draw for the Quarter Finals of the Irish Mace:

Quarter Final 1:
Sunday 5th March, UCC, 2pm
Motion: 'THBT the NAACP should publicly condemn Chris Brown'
1st Prop: UCC Philosoph (Becky West & Davy Jones)
1st Opp: TCD Hist (John Doody & Liam O’Neill)
2nd Prop: UL DebU (Stephen Egan & David Hartery)

Quarter Final 2:
Monday 12th March, Dublin (place TBC), 7pm
Motion: THW ban “My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding”
1st Prop: TCD Hist (John Engle & Adam Noonan)
1st Opp: TCD Hist (Lorcan Cullen & Chris Rooke)
2nd Prop: TCD Phil (Ricky McCormack & Fletch Williams)
2nd Opp: UCD L&H (Sarah Taaffe-Maguire & Cormac Duffy)

Quarter Final 3:
Monday 12th March, Dublin (place TBC), 7pm
Motion: TTHW abolish the two categories for Best Actor/Actress and Best Supporting Actor/Actress at the Academy Awards and award only gender neutral Oscars for Best Acting and Best Supporting Acting
1st Prop: UCD L&H (Ciaran Garrett & Michael O’Dwyer)
1st Opp: TCD Hist (Ciaran Parkin & Kate Oliver)
2nd Prop: UL Deb U (Lorna Bogue & Michelle Coyle)
2nd Opp: NUIG (Shane Gavin & Ruth Cormican)

Quarter Final 4:
Tuesday 13th March, Dublin (place TBC), 7pm
Motion: TTHBT notable LGB figures should not describe their sexuality as a choice
1st Prop: TCD Phil (Derwin Brennan & Orflaith Sheehy)
1st Opp: Kings Inns (Aine Hartigan & Liam O’Connell)
2nd Prop: UCD L&H (Christine Simpson & Mark Haughton)
2nd Opp:DCU (Ceile Varley & David Gormley)

Highlights of the Irish Times Final 2012

Here is a YouTube video of the "highlights" of the Irish Times Final 2012. It's not very long and even then there is a bit too much filler material and not enough footage from the debate but it features some of the speeches by the winners.

#WUDC on the internet

IDEA have prepared an infographic with statistics from the Twitter and live streaming activity surrounding worlds in Manila last December/January.

How many people watched the debates? How many people were talking about Worlds every day? The graphic shows who the top tweeters (is that the word) were and how activity peaked in the run up to the final.  It also shows how many people were watching the live debates on line and where they were from.

Pan-American Universities Debating Championship

The Lawrence Debate Union of the University of Vermont will be hosting the Pan-American Universities Debating Championship on March 23^rd and 24^th. This tournament will be the first of 2012 to be conducted in Spanish. The format of this tournament is the British Parliamentary style of debate. An excellent and experienced adjudication team will set the topics. 

We are currently attempting to bring more institutions into the fold and provide access to a debate tournament for students who are either native Spanish speakers, or the students who are particularly advanced speakers. If you could forward this email to students within your department who you think may be interested in this type of event, it would be greatly appreciated.

If you (or any others) have questions they should feel free to contact me at john.sadek@uvm.edu

For more information, please see:

http://debate.uvm.edu/debateblog/PanAmericano/Hola.html

or

http://debate.uvm.edu/debateblog/PanAmerican/Welcome.html for the English version.

Best Regards,

John Sadek

Manila Intervarsity Results

The Manila Intervarsity hosted by UPManila concluded on Sunday with the following result:

Champion: Ateneo xxxxxxx
Runner-up: UPDiliman B

Best Speaker: Leloy Claudio (Ateneo Awkward)
Best Speaker of the Final: Glenn Tuazon (Ateneo xxxxxxx)
Best Novice Speaker: Edbert Ragadio (Ateneo Awkward)

Tab isn't out yet. We'll post it when it is.

RCSI and UCD Med Soc win Irish Times 2012

Eoin Kelleher and Elizabeth Ahern-Flynn from the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland have won the 2012 Irish Times Debating Competition (the Irish national Championships).  Michael Conroy of the UCD Medical Society won the individual prize. The motion for the final was “That This House Would Abolish Prisons”,

Runners-up in the team category were Mark Haughton and Christine Simpson of UCD’s Literary and Historical Society, and Liam Brophy of the College Historical Society, TCD, in the individual category

The other finalists were Ian Curran and Adam Noonan of the TCD Historical Society, and Ruth Keating and Rebecca Keating of the TCD Philosophical Society.  In the individual category the finalists were Hannah Lucey of the UCD Literary and Historical society, and Rían Derrig of the TCD Historical Society.

Vic Australs 2012

Official Registration Policy

The following outlines the formal registration policy that we will be using for Australs 2012. Please note the disclaimer and contact us if you have any questions. Read the whole document. There may be a quiz. As a final point of introduction: I will unashamedly use real institutions in my examples. Deal with that.

You may not request this document in either of the other two national languages of New Zealand: Te Reo Maori or New Zealand Sign Language.

Disclaimer

The registration team reserves the right to change any of the rules below at any stage. Changes will only be made if absolutely necessary, will be minimal, and will be posted on the Australs 2012 website.

Dates and deadlines

The dates for the different phases are:

Monday 5 March 8pm NZDT: registration opens

Friday 16 March 11:59pm NZDT: registration closes

Monday 2 April: ½ payment due

Tuesday 1 May: full payment due

Wednesday 2 May: individual registration opens

Friday 19 May: individual registration closes

Registration

Registration is to be done by an institution representative through a form on the Australs 2012 website. A mock copy of this form will be published in advance so that people know what information they will need to provide.

The team cap per institution during the registration phase (5 – 16 March) will be 2. Every institution who registers within that period is guaranteed up to 2 teams. We expect institutions to be definite by the registration phase on how many teams they initially register (0, 1 or 2).

Institutions will also be asked how many teams maximum they would like to send to Australs, in the event that there is space under the team cap once all institutions have been allocated their initial spots of up to 2. This maximum number may be changed later, and doesn’t oblige the institution to send that many extra teams. See more information on waitlist teams below.

Institutions must also follow the rules of the Australian Intervarsity Debating Association (AIDA) as set out in articles 22, 23, 24 of the AIDA Constitution. The Association will publish these for you. Be especially aware that your debaters must be enrolled to study at your institution and note the affirmative action requirements set out by AIDA.

Waitlist teams

The time of registration within the registration period will become a ranking for the order that institutions will be offered extra teams on the waitlist. Directly after the registration period closes the waitlist will be used to offer subsequent spots to institutions, as well as any time a team pulls out or misses a payment deadline.

The waitlist will be traversed top to bottom, offering one team to each institution that still has fewer than their nominated maximum number of desired teams. Once at the bottom of the list the first team will be next to be asked again. Institutions may change their desired maximum at any stage but will always have to wait for the next time they are reached on the waitlist. This means that an institution will always have a ranking, even where they have their maximum teams. Such an institution can increase their desired maximum and become active to be asked next time they are hit.

For example:

… Rank 12: Monash wants a maximum of 6, has 3 Rank 13: Sydney wants a maximum of 2, has 2 …

If Sydney get in touch and want to up their maximum to 6 then on a second run through the wailist Monash is offered a fourth team and Sydney are next offered a third team. Sydney didn’t get offered an extra team on the first run through as they had indicated that they were at their desired maximum.

There will be no preference given to institutions on the waiting list which don’t have two teams. For example if Auckland doesn’t register by 16 March and a week later asks me to be registered, they will be put at the end of the wait list ranking. They will be offered a first team after the last initially registered institution has been offered their third (assuming that last institution has a desired maximum of more than two teams).

Any institution offered a spot has one week to confirm whether they accept that team before it will be offered elsewhere. The offer will be sent by email to the institution representative who registered, and the week will count from the date of sending. It is up to the representative to check his/her emails. From one month before the tournament the registration team reserves the right to contact representatives by telephone and force faster acceptance of extra teams.

Institutions have two weeks from the day of acceptance to fully settle payments for their new team unless that would mean paying earlier than one of the original deadlines, in which case the original deadline is used. This will also include payment for one extra adjudicator to match their new n-1

requirement, except where an adjudicator moves into the contingent who was previously registered as an affiliated independent.

Adjudicators

Institutions must register exactly n-1 adjudicators, unless they send only one team in which case they may choose to bring one adjudicator. N-1 means one fewer adjudicator than the number of teams sent. Institutions wanting to send more adjudicators need to ask their adjudicators past n-1 to apply to attend independently. Such independent judges will still be affiliated to the institution. They will be announced as breaking from their institution and naturally will be conflicted from seeing them.

This means:

1 team = 0 or 1 adjudicator(s)

2 teams = 1 adjudicator

3 teams = 2 adjudicators

and so on. Any institution that registers for 0 teams and 0 adjudicators will be frowned upon. That is unlikely to be of consequence to them at the tournament.

Members of the adjudication core do not, and cannot, count as an adjudicator from any institution.

Independent adjudicators

Institutions with more than n-1 adjudicators wanting to attend Australs 2012 should have their extra adjudicators apply to attend independently. Independent adjudicators need not be from a particular institution, and may be from anywhere in the world (bump: Woolgar, Jones). There will be a separate registration form for independent adjudicators.

On the independent form adjudicators may choose to enter an institution to be affiliated with. Adjudicators who choose an institution will be known as ‘affiliated independent adjudicators’. These adjudicators will be identified as from an institution and expected to pay registration with that institution. However they will have no bearing on n-1 or affirmative action for that institution (see more detail under ‘Final adjudicator note’ and ‘Adjudicators, contingents and affirmative action’).

When filling out the independent adjudicator form, applicants will be required to prove their competency to adjudicate. The registration team reserves a right of complete discretion on who they accept, and may ask for more information or arrange to speak with an applicant. The standard is set by the registration team in consultation with the adjudication core. It will be applied fairly and equally to all applicants. Promise.

The status of independent adjudicator does not in any way promise funding. Nor does it promise that you will be seeing better debates or performing better on the adjudication test than other adjudicators.

Final adjudicator note

For the avoidance of doubt I will make things clear and put them very bluntly. Your n-1 adjudicators are not assessed (or your first adjudicator if sending only one team); all others are. There is a separate form for them to fill out. Every time you are offered a new team you must bring one more adjudicator but you also gain one more not assessed adjudicator spot. It is fine if you wish to move someone who was an affiliated independent into your n-1 spots to support n-1 for that new team.

An adjudicator may be denied as an independent adjudicator but still make up one of your n-1 spots. You may wish to think of these as ‘free’ or ‘non-assessed’ adjudicator spots. An adjudicator who has been denied independent status may even become part of a previously full squad when you are offered a new team and so need a new adjudicator.

Finally: having said all of this, do not let your adjudicators be daunted by the independent application process.

Adjudicators, contingents and affirmative action

The AIDA constitution provides (among other things, including more specific n-1 rules):

23.1 A third of all debating contingents must be female.

23.7 A debating contingent is to be comprised by debaters and only by as many adjudicators as required to satisfy the n minus one rule.

We will define your contingent as all teams plus the specific n-1 adjudicators. These n-1 adjudicators will not have applied for independent adjudicator status, or will have moved from independent status into n-1 at a later stage after waitlisted teams have been accepted.

For example:

 Victoria has three teams and six adjudicators

Two of those adjudicators are (and must be) n-1 adjudicators

The other four adjudicators are affiliated independent adjudicators

Victoria’s contingent is defined as the three teams and the specific two ‘n-1’ adjudicators. Victoria cannot use an affiliated independent to count as part of the contingent in place of one of the n-1 adjudicators for the purposes of meeting the affirmative action requirements.

If you are only sending one team but also the allowed one adjudicator (the exception to strict n-1 limits) then your adjudicator doesn’t count towards your affirmative action requirements. I.e. if you send one team it must have at least one female debater and if you send one judge their gender is irrelevant for affirmative action.

To clarify an AIDA rule: you cannot round up to having one third of your contingent as female. If your contingent ends up as five teams and therefore four n-1 adjudicators (19 people total) then you need at least seven female contingent members, not six. Note that you would also need to meet all other AIDA rules, including that one third of your top three teams need to be female debaters.

Observers

Campuses may send observers. They have no bearing on any AIDA requirements including affirmative action or n-1. Observers have a 33% higher registration fee. This is to compensate for the fact that many sponsors are only willing to sponsor participants in the tournament.

Payment

The payment dates above are not flexible and they are non-negotiable. Failure to pay on time will result in teams being offered to the waitlist. In cases of extreme emergency I will consider written explanations, preferably in advance, for why you cannot pay. Note though that teams from Christchurch and Japan succeeded in paying on time in 2011.

Remember that international transfers take time to clear. Pay before the payment deadline. If the money isn’t in our account on time but you can provide proof of transfer from the week before then you will be accepted as having met the deadline. There may be a prize for the institution that plays the currency markets the most skilfully.

It is the responsibility of attending institutions to take on fees for currency conversion and international transfers. We will count you as having paid the amount that enters the Australs 2012 bank account. The registration fee is $750 New Zealand Dollars per debater or adjudicator. The fee for observers is $1000 New Zealand Dollars. Details of the bank account to send registration to will be sent to the institution representatives after the registration phase closes. Those details will also be posted on the Australs 2012 website.

Teams who have underpaid or overpaid will have their accounts settled in New Zealand Dollars on the registration day of Australs 2012. All teams from an underpaying institution will be ineligible to compete in the main break or the ESL break until they have settled their debts. Being ineligible to compete in a break round does not advance a team to the next break round. Cheeky.

Payment is non-refundable. We use it to pay in advance for the tournament to be run. If you do not make it to the tournament you will not be refunded.

Contact

If you have any queries or need clarification please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sebastian Templeton

Registration Officer, Australs 2012 Vice-President (New Zealand), AIDA

registration@australs2012.com

Royals 2012 Results

Greetings everyone! The Royal Malaysian Intervarsity Debate Competition (Royals) 2012 came to a close yesterday. Congratulations to UT Mara for winning both Senior and Junior categories.

The results and motions from the tournament are as follows:

Senior Category:
IIUM (Gov) v UTMARA (Opp)

Champion: University Teknologi Mara (UTMARA).
The team: Mai Mokhsein, Aina Salleh, Shafiq Bazari, Esmael

Runners Up: Intl. Islamic Uni. Malaysia (IIUM)
The team: Sarah Shahriman, Syed Saddiq, Arinah Najwa, Senad Hardovic

Best speaker final: Shafiq Bazari

Final Motion: THBT serving civil servants and politicians-in-office should
not be awarded honorific titles

Junior Category:
IIUM (Gov) v UTMARA (Opp)

Champion: University Teknologi Mara (UTMARA).
The team: Mifzal, Emelia, Muayyad, Addina

Runners Up: Intl. Islamic Uni. Malaysia (IIUM)
The team: Zim Ahmadi, Jaber, Audi

Best Speaker Final: Mifzal
Final Motion: TH would limit the terms of all Members of Parliament to only
two terms in office.

Tournament Top 10 Best Speakers Senior Category
1. Mai Mokhsein (UiTM)
2. Aina Salleh (UiTM)
3. Arinah Najwa (IIUM)
4. Syed Saddiq (IIUM)
5. Mohd Shafiq (UiTM)
6. Sarah Shahriman (IIUM)
6. Jiradevi Veerasiman (UM)
8. Lavania (UM)
9. Jeremy Chong (UKM)
9. Avinash (UM)

Tournament Top 10 Best Speakers Junior Category
1. Zim Ahmadi (IIUM)
2. Daniel (UPM)
3. Muayad (UiTM)
4. Mifzal (UiTM)
4. Audi Ali (IIUM)
6. Sabrina (UPM)
7. Jaber (IIUM)
8. Emelia (UiTM)
8. Areej (UPM)
10. Albert (UNIMAS)

Motions:
ROYALS 2012:
Round 1: SOCIETY
1. THBT we should not give money to beggars
2. THBT the State should impose a strict curfew on minors
3. THW impose traffic fines based on a percentage of the offender’s income

Round 2: FLORA AND THE FAUNA
1. THBT First World Countries Must Accept Environmental Refugees
2. THW recognize animal land rights in development project
3. THBT climate conferences are a waste of time

Round 3: SCIENCE AND TECH
1. THBT it is time to stop space exploration
2. THW forbid the pursuit of self-learning artificial intelligence
3. THBT intellectual property laws are obsolete in the digital age

Round 4: ECONOMICS & LABOUR
1. THW rather support 12 Ramli Burgers stands than one Burger King
2. THW disallow workers in essential sectors from striking
3. THW nationalise all banks

Break Rounds:

Junior Quarterfinals: the MIDDLE EAST
1. THBT the international community should leave Syria alone
2. THW demand the immediate transfer of power from Egypt’s ruling military
council to a civilian authority
3. THW Enforce a nuclear free Middle East

Senior Quarterfinals: IRAN
1. THBT Obama has been “too soft” on Iran
2. THS the European Union’s embargo on Iranian oil
3. THBT the international community should leave Iran alone

Junior Semifinals: “Point and laugh. Or maybe not.” GENDER & SEXUALITY
1. THW no longer recognize being called a homosexual as a valid ground to
sue for defamation
2. THW recognise a 3rd gender
3. THBT in conservative societies, special schools should be set up for
LGBT students

Senior Semifinals: EVERYDAY POLITICS

1. THS the Obama administration’s move that requires insurance companies to
absorb the costs of contraceptive healthcare
2. THBT the Justice and Development Party, not the army, are the biggest
threat to Turkish democracy
3. THW not allow corporations to make political contributions

Junior Grand Finals: Malaysia
1. TH would limit terms of all Members of Parliament to only two terms in
office.

Senior Grand finals: Malaysia
1. THBT serving civil servants and politicians-in-office should not be
awarded honorific titles
2. THW replace moral classes with religious classes for non-Muslims in
public schools
3. THW grant the right to vote only to residing Malaysians

I will post the tabs asap.

Congratulations to all. On behalf of the Adjudication Core (CA- Dr Chandran (UM), DCAs - Tariq Maketab <http://www.facebook.com/tariq.maketab> (UiTM), Ian Howell (USM), Dr Yasmin (USM), we thank all debaters, adjudicators, runners, organisers and those involved directly or indirectly with the
tournament.

Once again, thank you.

Danial, DCA (IIUM)

Kinkaid Seeks Head of Debate Program, Middle School Debate Teacher/Coach

The Kinkaid School in Houston, Texas has two debate openings beginning in August. For more information, please contact Jim Dunaway (jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>>>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org><mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org<mailto:jim.dunaway@kinkaid.org>>>>>), Dean of Faculty.

Head of Debate Program

Duties:  Organizes and runs a nationally competitive debate program; develops the debate curriculum and teaches Upper School Debate classes; supports the Middle School debate teacher; organizes team travel and arranges logistical support; stays abreast of current debate topics; helps students research and develop arguments; organizes after school work sessions; monitors student academic performance; advises a small group of students; carries out other routine duties as assigned; travels with team to major national tournaments (about 2-3 per month).

Requirements for the position include significant experience as coach and debater; experience with, and enjoyment of, this age group; at least a bachelor’s degree in an academic field; availability to work with students after regular school hours; ability to travel frequently.

Kinkaid’s debate program is recognized nationally for its excellence and participates regularly in the most competitive local, regional, and national high school tournaments.  Kinkaid is highly competitive in both Lincoln-Douglas and policy debate.

Middle School Debate Teacher/Coach

Kinkaid’s debate program is recognized nationally for its excellence and participates regularly in the most competitive local, regional, and national high school tournaments.  Kinkaid is highly competitive in both Lincoln-Douglas and policy debate.

Duties:  teaches seventh and eighth grade debate and one or two middle or upper school classes in a discipline such as English or history, coaches the middle school debate team, shares weekend debate tournament responsibilities with the director of debate, and advises a small group of middle school students.

Requirements:  experience as a debater, and preferably as a coach; experience with, and enjoyment of, this age group; at least a bachelor’s degree in an academic field; availability to work with students after regular school hours; ability to travel frequently.

Contact: Jim Dunaway
Dean of Faculty
The Kinkaid School

At-Large Invited Teams for the HWS / IDEA Round Robin

Seven teams have been invited to attend the 2012 RR based on their applications. Below is a list of those teams and a couple of their achievements.

Hart House (Sam Greene & Steve Penner)

-- 2010 Canadian BP Champions, 2011 CUSID Champions, etc.

Loyola Marymount (James Kilcup & Dearbhail O'Crowley)

-- 2011 Cambridge Finalists, 2011 Yale IV Finalist, etc.

Tel Aviv (Omer Nevo & Sella Nevo)

-- 2012 World ESL Champions, 2011 Euros ESL Champions, etc.

UCD L&H (Michael O'Dwyer & Christine Simpson)

-- 2012 Worlds Semi-Finalists, 2011 Edinburgh Cup Finalists, etc.

Univ. of London (Fred Cowell & Rosie Unwin)

-- Semis & top of the tab at 2010 Euros, Broke at Worlds 2008 & 2006, etc.

Yale (Max Dovala & Kate Falkenstien)

-- Broke 6th at 2012 Worlds, 2011 US UDC Finalists, etc.

Yale (Nick Cugini & Ben Kornfeld)

-- 2011 Worlds Semi-finalists, Oxford IV Semi-finalists in 2010 & 2011, etc.

We will be deciding on judges in the near future.

2012 HWS / IDEA Round Robin Automatic Bid Teams

The following 9 teams have confirmed that they will be attending the 2012 RR based on their accomplishments in 2011.

Cambridge (Maria English & Tom Powell)

International Mace Champion

Cornell (Alex Bores & Ryan Yeh)

Hart House IV Champions

Hart House (Veenu Goswami & Josh Stark)

Canadian BP Champions

Oxford (Ben Woolgar & Will Jones)

Euros Champion

Pretoria (Katherine Harding & Debby Nixon)

Pan-African Champions

RVCE (Prasun Bhaiya & Karthik Sivaram)

Asian BP Champions

Stanford (Michael Baer & Shengwu Li)

Worlds Finalist & Yale IV Champion *

Sydney (Dominic Bowes & Paul Karp)

Australian BP Champion

Sydney (Joanna Connolly & Daniel Swain)

Oxford IV Champion & Worlds Finalist *

* Denotes a double-qualifying team

The teams filling the remaining 7 at-large spots will be announced shortly.

Kent IV 2012

Dear Debaters,

This year the University of Kent will be hosting our first IV on Saturday March 31st on our Canterbury campus.

BP style debating with four rounds, a semi and a final!

Open to all standards of debaters!

A fab social after the final!

Definitely some free food!

Cheap registration fee! Only £20 if paid in advance or £25 on the day!  Details of advance payment will be sent soon!

 

CA Team to be announced...

and

REGISTRATION IS NOW OPEN

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE1LRzJsVDRlVk9UT09NNC1vZEIydEE6MQ

Register here ^ - if you have any issues, all you need to do is get in touch!

 

Our building fully caters to those with additional needs so just drop me an e-mail if you have any and your debating rooms will be assigned accordingly :)

contact:
debates@kentdebating.co.uk
if you have any questions!

http://www.facebook.com/#!/events/177765048997411/
www.kentdebating.co.uk
www.twitter.com/kentdebating

--
Monifa Walters-Thompson
Debate Convenor
Kent Debating Society

"Kent's Best New Society 2010"
www.kentdebating.co.uk

Finalists in the 2012 Irish Times

After 4 months of debating the Irish Times Finalists have now been announced.

Teams:
1st Prop - TCD Hist - Ian Curren & Adam Noonan
1st Opp - TCD Phil Ruth Keating & Rebecca Keating
2nd Prop - RCSI Eoin Kelleher & Elizabeth Ahern-Flynn
2nd Opp - UCD L&H Mark Haughton & Christine Simpson

Individuals:
1st Prop - UCD Med Soc Michael Conroy
1st Opp - TCD Hist - Liam Brophy
2nd Prop - UCD L&H Hannah Lucey
2nd Opp - TCD Hist Rian Derrig

The grand Final will be held on Friday the 17th of February in the Royal College of Surgeons. The motion for the final will be This house would Abolish Prisons.  The guest chair will be Minister for Enterprise, Jobs and innovation Richard Bruton TD.

Sciences Po Le Havre IV 2012: 13-14 April!

Sciences Po IV is back and MUCH BIGGER and BETTER!
Sciences Po Paris (Le Havre Campus) presents the Fourth Sciences Po IV, promising you two days of great debates and great fun AND a BRILLIANT CA team!

CA Team:

Jack Watson
- CA for Bristol IV 2011, CA for Warwick IV 2011, CA for Imperial Open 2011, Quarter-finalist of WUDC 2012, Semi-finalist of WUDC 2011, Finalist EUDC 2010, Best Speaker and Winner of Cambridge IV 2011, Winner of TCD IV 2011, Finalist SOAS IV 2010, Finalist Durham IV 2010, Best Speaker of York IV 2010, Best Speaker of Warwick IV 2010, Best Speaker of Manchester IV 2010, Second Best Speaker of EUDC 2011

Isabelle Fischer (Loewe)
- DCA for Berlin WUDC 2013, CA for Edinburgh Cup, ESL Champion, EUDC 2006, Panel Judge for Finals of EUDC 2011, ESL Semifinalist of WUDC 2007, DCA Tallinn Euros 2008, Breaking Judge at WUDC 2009 and 2010

Niall Sherry
- Winner Irish Times Debating Competition 2010, HWS Round Robin 2010, Winner Kingsmill-Moore Invitational 2011, Finalist UCD IV 2010, Maynooth Open 2011, Semi-Finalist Galway Open 2011,DCU Open 2011, Cambridge IV 2009

Anne Valkering
- Winner of WUDC ESL 2008, finalist of EUDC 2006, CA of SciencesPo IV 2009 and 2010, CA UCU Open 2011, Convenor of Amsterdam EUDC 2010, DCA Dutch Nationals 2009, Convener EUDC 2010, CA Bonaparte Debate Tournament 2007, DCA Amsterdam Open 2008 and 2009

About the IV:
• 7 minute speeches
• 5 preliminary rounds
• Separate ESL breaks to semis
• Open breaks to semis
• All meals provided
• Wine and Cheese!
• Two socials
• Yakka!

Registration:
The registration fee is 25 euros/person (two teams per university ONLY)
Cap - 48 teams, so secure your spot NOW before they are filled!

Adjudicator: n-1 rule applies. Fees does not apply.
Crash is guaranteed for both, Debaters and Adjudicators.

*Please Register at the following link:
Registration will be open till 15th March.

*Pre-payment is required to guarantee a spot. Please send your receipt after the bank transfer to scpoiv@gmail.com.
Refer to our website for more details.


Schedule:
Friday 13th April 2012

12:00 – 14:00 Registration and briefing
13:00 – 14:00 Lunch
14:15 – 16:15 Debate: Round 1
16:15 – 16:30 Break
16:30 – 18:30 Round 2
18:30 – 18:45 Break
18:45 – 20:45 Round 3
21:00 – 22:00 Dinner
23:00: Social

Saturday 14th April 2012

10:00 – 12:00 Round 4
12:00 – 13:00 Lunch
13:00 – 15:00 Round 5
15:00 – 15:15 Break
15:30 – 17:30 Semi-Finals
17:30 – 18:00 Snacks
18:00 – 20:00 Final
22:30 – 23:00 Awards, dinner and closing ceremony
23:30: Social


How to get to Le Havre:

Train: When you reach Paris, travel to Gare St. Lazare and take the train to Le Havre (a 2-hours ride).

Ferry: Take a ferry from Portsmouth to Le Havre (8 hours)

Please let us know when you arrive at the station or the port, so we can pick you up!


For more information, please refer to :www.sciencespoiv2012.webs.com
Contact us at: scpoiv@gmail.com

Call for Trainers : 1st IDEA Asia Youth Forum : 11th to 27th May 2012 : Thailand‏

Greetings everyone,

I'm sharing this message on behalf of IDEA (International Debate Education
Association).

IDEA is proud to announce the first ever Asia Youth Forum. Modeled after
the IDEA Youth Forum (now in its 18th year) the Asia Youth Forum aims to
bring together the most enthusiastic students and teachers, to learn debate
skills and content around a specific theme. We are looking to build a team
of regional trainers for this event, and if you are interested, please
apply! The format used will be Karl Popper but capable trainers from other
formats are encouraged to apply.

The details of the forum

- Theme : Crossing Borders : Migration in Asia
- Dates : 11th to 27th of May 2012
- Location : Bangkok, Thailand
- Trainer Application Deadline : 21st February 2012
- Target audience : High school students from all over Asia
- Trainer application process, criteria, expectations and benefits are
detailed in the Call for Trainers and Application form (attached with this
email and available on http://www.idebate.org/asiayouthforum)

We realize that the dates do clash with the UADC tournament. Unfortunately
these dates were the most optimum for the high school debaters and
educators that form the core of the Asia Youth Forum. We realize that some
people who may be interested in training at the Youth Forum may wish to
also attend the UADC and for this reason we are doing our best to
accommodate those schedules by making necessary allowances. If you need to
leave earlier to attend the UADC, indicate so on the Trainer Application
form.

For questions or comments, email cnasuwan@idebate.org or loganimal@gmail.com.
More details are also available on our website at
http://www.idebate.org/asiayouthforum

The registration process for teams will open soon and you'll be getting
another message when that happens =]

Cheers
Logan
Curriculum Director
IDEA Asia Youth Forum

2012 Madison Cup Debates Invite‏

On behalf of the James Madison Center, and JMU Debate we are pleased and excited to invite you to compete for the Madison Cup at the 12th annual “James Madison Commemorative Debate and Citizens Forum” on Thursday, April 12th, 2012.

The James Madison Commemorative Debate and Citizens Forum is a unique inter-collegiate debate competition, which combines the excitement and challenge of tournament competition with the relevance and empowerment of a public audience and audience participation.  

We are pleased to continue our partnership with The Arthur N. Rupe Foundation. The funding provided by the Rupe Foundation allows us to provide prize money to the top ten teams, the top twelve debaters and three teams qualifying for travel stipends.

2012 Topic: This House stands resolved that: The United States has an obligation to support emerging democracies in the Middle East and Northern Africa

Other cool and unique features:
                *$30,000.00 in prize money
                *Debating and competing in front of public audiences
                *No entry fees
                *Continental breakfast, snacks and lunch provided
                *Video web-cast of the final round
                *Great PR for your debate program

The tournament details are enclosed with this letter.  If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

We look forward to hosting you in April!

Mike Davis, Ph. D.                                                                            Pete Bsumek, Ph.D.
Co-Director, Madison Cup Debates                                          Co-Director, Madison Cup Debates
School of Comm. Studies                                                              School of Comm. Studies
James Madison University                                                           James Madison University
(O) 540-568-7308                                                                              (O) 540-568-3386
(E-mail) davismk@jmu.edu                                                         (E-mail) bsumekpk@jmu.edu

Background: The James Madison Center at James Madison University sponsors the event in the spirit of James Madison's ideal that a republican democracy is healthy only when informed and civil debate thrives. The final round will be broadcast on the World Wide Web.  Last year’s debate featured teams from American University, City University of New York, Claremont Colleges, Cornell University, George Mason University, James Madison University, Liberty University, Piedmont College, Southeastern College, Towson University, University of Alaska, University of Mary Washington, University of Richmond, University of Vermont, Virginia Commonwealth University, Wake Forest University, and Yale University.

The Arthur N. Rupe Foundation has agreed to serve as the sponsor for the 2012 Madison Cup and we are humbled by their continued commitment to furthering public debate. They have agreed to maintain team and student awards from last year, as well increasing travel stipends to a total of $10,000 for teams that qualify through the application process outlined below.

We are hopeful that this will be the strongest field that we have had so please enter early.

Eligible Participants:  Each school may enter one two-person team.  The debate is open to undergraduate students who are in good standing at their respective institutions.  Second teams will be considered on a case-by-case basis, if space permits. 

Competition Format:  The debate uses a “long table” format.  This is a public debate.   Last year there was an audience of around 500 people for the final round, preliminary rounds were smaller (audiences of 20-30 people).   The “long table” format features three (two person) teams on each side of the question.  Speeches start with the affirmative and alternate between the affirmative and negative throughout the debate.  Teams are randomly assigned to sides and speaker positions.  In other words, if a team is selected to be the first affirmative, they will give the first two affirmative speeches in the debate.  The first and last speeches on each side of the question are uninterruptible.  Any member of the opposing team may interrupt the speeches in the middle of the debate in order to ask the speaker to yield to a question.  Speakers are not required to answer these questions (although not answering questions may cause the audience to think that the speaker is “dodgy”).  Please see the example format below for more information.  You can view the 2010 final round at: http://www.jmu.edu/debate/madisoncup/2010.shtml

Jury Adjudication Procedure:  A three to seven member panel, or jury, will adjudicate the debate.  Juries will be comprised of local residents, students, professors, distinguished JMU alumni, and special invited guests.  At the completion of the debate, the panel will adjourn to discuss, deliberate and decide upon the winners as a group.  The jury votes for (2-person) teams, not sides of the question.  In other words, first place could go to an affirmative team, while second place could be awarded to a negative team. 

Tournament Procedures:
*Number of rounds: This year we will offer three preliminary rounds of debate and one final round.
*Switch side debate: Each team will debate at least once on the affirmative and once on the negative. 
*Side & position:  Sides (affirmative or negative), and positions (first affirmative team, first negative team, second affirmative team, etc) for the preliminary debates will be determined by random drawing.
*Judging: Judges will rank teams 1-6 in each preliminary debate, and assign each team quality points based on a one hundred point scale (1-100).
*Advancing to the final round: The six teams with the lowest total ranks will advance to the final round.  Quality points will be used to break ties.
*Sides and Speaking Positions in the final round:  Sides and speaking positions in the final round will be based on seeding after the preliminary rounds.  For example, the first seeded team will choose their “side and position,” then the second seed will choose “side and position,” and so on.

Public Participation:  While the jury deliberates, the floor will be opened for audience comments and speeches.  An award for the best floor speech will be presented.  Local newspapers, politicians, and the general public are invited.

Awards:  The first place team will leave with the Madison Cup—a very nice traveling trophy. Once again this year there is a $15,000.00 purse of prize money.  All participants in the final round will be recognized with awards.
                                Prize money will be awarded as follows:
                                1st place: $5000.00 donation to your debate program
                                2nd place: $3000.00 donation to your debate program
                                3rd place: $2000.00 donation to your debate program
                                4th—6th place: $1000.00 donation to your debate program
                                7th-10th place: $500.00 donation to your debate program

Any student who participates in the final round will receive a prize to be distributed in the form of a scholarship. The top team will receive $2,000 per student and the remaining students in the final round will receive $1,000. This is a doubling of student prize money from last year.

Entry:  There are no entry fees. We can accommodate a field of 36 teams.  Entry is on a first come, first serve basis.  The first 18 teams to enter are guaranteed a spot in the field, after that we will accept teams, if we can generate a field divisible by 4 or 6.  Deadline for entry is March 15th.  This is necessary so we can determine how many debates there will be in each round.  Send school info, team info (first and last names of debaters) and requests for additional teams to:  Dr. Mike Davis, davismk@jmu.edu

Travel Stipend: This year we are pleased to offer a travel stipend of $2,000 to three teams that are able to demonstrate that they would add significantly to the quality and diversity of teams participating in this year’s competition. In addition to these stipends we are also able to offer and additional $4,000 in smaller stipends to schools that are on the East Coast or would only require partial assistance. To complete your application for travel stipends please visit: http://jmu.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_3ZUZCKc3WFPUype

Your application should be submitted by March 1st. We will use the following criteria when deciding which teams are awarded the stipend:

·         Quality of Team- What is the team’s competitive success? Do they have prior public debate experience?

·         Diversity- How does the team add to the diversity of the event? Things such as regional, institution, debate format will all be considered.

·         Budget – What level of funding does your administration provide? How many students does that budget currently serve? Would the team be able to attend the competition otherwise?

·         Previous Competitor – Is your school new to the competition? Will participation in this event/receiving the stipend assist in future development of your debate program?

 Lodging: We have reserved a block of hotel rooms at two area hotels. Both rates will be available until March 18th.

 The Best Western Inn.  The phone number for the Best Western is 540-433-6089.  The rate for 1-4 people per room is $56.00 + tax.  When calling the Best Western Inn please mention that you are attending the Madison Cup debates at JMU.
The Comfort Inn. The phone number for The Comfort Inn is (540) 433-6066. The rate is 1-4 people per room is $79 + tax. When calling please mention that you are attending the Madison Cup debates at JMU.

 Travel:  James Madison University is located in Harrisonburg, VA, which is two hours southwest of Washington, D.C. on I-81.  If you plan to fly consider Dullas and Washington National/Reagan Airports in Washington DC (2 hours away), Richmond airport (2 hours away), Charlottesville airport (one hour away) and the Shenandoah Regional Airport (15 minutes away).  We will arrange transport from Shenandoah and Charlottesville, we’ll do our best to work with you from the others.

Schedule:
Thursday, April 12th, 2012:  James Madison Commemorative Debate and Citizens Forum
8:00 AM: Pick up at the Best Western or Warsaw Street Parking Deck
8:00AM-9:00AM  registration and Announcements
9:30 AM: Preliminary debate round 1
11:00 AM Preliminary debate round 2
1:00 PM Lunch
2:00PM: Preliminary debate round 3 (announcement of the final round participants)
5:00 PM: Final round (followed by the presentation of the Madison Cup)

Example Debate Format: The 2004 final round proceeded as follows.

1st Affirmative Speech (Wake Forest #1): (4 minutes) uninterrupted

 1st Negative Speech (George Mason #1): (4 minutes) uninterrupted

 2nd Affirmative Speech (Wake Forest  #2): (5 minutes):  The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 2nd Negative Speech (George Mason #2): (5 minutes): The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 3rd Affirmative Speech (Georgetown # 1): (5 minutes): The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 3rd Negative Speech (James Madison #1): (5 minutes): The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 4th Affirmative Speech (Georgetown #2): (5 minutes) The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 4th Negative Speech (James Madison #2): (5 minutes) The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 5th Affirmative Speech (Mary Washington #1):  (5 minutes) The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 5th Negative Speech (Towson #1): The first and last minute of the speech are uninterruptible.  In the 2nd-4th minutes of the speech any opposition debater may ask the speaker to yield to a question.  The speaker may accept, or decline the question.

 6th Affirmative Speech (Mary Washington #2):  (4 minutes) Uninterrupted

 6th Negative Speech (Towson University #2):  (4 minutes) Uninterrupted



Michael Davis
Assistant Professor/Director of Debate
James Madison University