# Debate doc ### Topic Will less work hours in Canada help average Canadians become happier - a guide line for `less work hour` could be 25-30/week vs 40/week Pro: Yes Con: No ### Teams and date - pro team: Connor, Bobby - con team: Vanessa, Siwei - moderator: Sam - referees: everyone willing to go through the trouble (yes scoring will be a bit complicated) - Date: January 31st, Friday ### Format - pre-debate - Topic Introduction (Tony) - What the topic is about - introduction to debate as an event - Debate rules (Sam) - explain what are expected from participants and audiences - explain what moderator is expected to do, including but not limited to: - timing the arguments, stop participant when over time. - stop participants on when arguments goes too chaotic, or fouls detected. - announce the procedure, and moderate the event as it goes. - debate round 1 - scoring explained - pro team #1 make opening arguments (4 min) - con team #2 counter arguments (3 min) - con team #1 make opening arguments (4 min) - pro team #2 counter arguments (3 min) - debate round 2 - scoring explained - free debate (4 min each side) - free debate is where all players are allow to say whatever they want, with minimal supervision from moderator, just so that it's not so messy. - debate final - scoring explained - con team #2 make summary/closing statement (3.5 min) - pro team #2 make summary/closing statement (3.5 min) - post debate - everyone will have a chance to question both teams, for whatever points that they feel that are not clear. - voting/scoring takes place. - final result is announced ### Scoring machanism Every referee is expected to vote on the following creteria, for each team - **organization**: how well-organized the statements are, are they well connected and easy to understand - **use of argument**: are the arguments very powerful/convincing - **relevancy**: In cases where applicable, does the statements answer questions/critics from the other team - **personal perference**: how do you personally like the performance, only given at the very end, after post-debate questions are answered | Scoring sheet | Organization | use of argument | relevancy | personal perference | | -------- | -------- | -------- | --- | --- | | opeing statement | 1-15 | 1-10 | N/A | N/A | | counter opening statement | N/A | 1-10 | 1-5 | N/A | | free debate | N/A | 1-15 | 1-15 | N/A | | closing summary | 1-10 | 1-15 | N/A | N/A | | post debate | N/A | N/A | N/A | 1-5 | - scoring needs to be explained in detail to players as soon as possible, and to audiences before the event. - average of all scores will be used to determine winner of the event ### Secondary Evaluation metric - before and after the debate, everyone will be asked to take their sides on the topic: `pro`, `not sure`, `con`. We will also be evaluating the debate result based on how many people changed their ideas. ### Preparation guide - decide within the team, who is going to be #1 and #2 - make finer definitions on the debate topic - a wel-rounded definition of your debate topic is very important. - what is happiness, more importantly, how do we measure it, how would you argue about being happier - long term happiness vs short term happiness is another angle where debates can happen - if there are questions/confusions, ask as soon as possible - make sure your definitions can stand by themselves, and be ready to defend them when challenged by your opponents - when appropriate, make other interpolations to the debate topic - you can spin some arguments around these interpolations as well - be very careful - the interpolations themselves might be challenged. - evidence gathering - gather evidence on both your arguments and potential arguments from your opponents - keep in mind we do not have scores solely on evidences, use them to support your arguments. - brainstorming - all sorts of things you can think about - arguments - opponents' arguments - how to counter opponents' arguments - how to counter opponents' counter arguments - mock debate - mock the debate between yourselves