I'll be
honest that while I was up voicing my point to the opposition, I thought my performance w
as decent. I was trying to be as literate as I could without overdoing it. Unfortunately, I probably should elaborate on my points more and add more substantial information, since in th
e middle of it all I had a really unprofessional pause because I wasn't sure what to say next. I barely scratched four minutes (and the time limit was five). Before going up, I should estimate the time my points would utilize, then add to it if I have more time, whether the additions be refutes or increments of the house's previous statements. Obviously, to do so would take more analytic skills on my part.
That takes me to something else I should work on: creating strong refutations against the opposition. I realized that Michelle had some decent refutations that I think I could learn from. Then both Whips were good too, with a good amount of solidity in their speech's essences and mental composure.
You have really good word choice and sentence flow..
ReplyDeleteHaha thanks for the compliment but you should really follow Tiffany's refutations. Hers are really good. The way I refutate against someone is going with how I feel about their points. If I feel like "Oh my God, THAT IS SO NOT TRUE!" then That's how I refute against my opponent. Every point has a weak side and the speaker is always going to want to hide it. So make sure you see through and find it.
ReplyDeleteTo Ezekiel:
ReplyDeleteAh, thank you! I can say the same for you!
To Michelle:
No problem, and I'll definitely work on that..