G’day (G’Die) mate ^ ^ my australs fans lover or any debating system toward our beloved country, Indonesia. I am here as the “spectator” who loves to get involved in debating community had to say hello to everyone and good luck to everybody. hehe… its not a good argument… but i guess its just all the resume about what had been i touched in debate.
well… after i seen on many debate championship in Indonesia, i made a conclusion that the rule in Indonesian debating is getting wacky and messy. why i’ve supposed to say? let me bring you into a very “surfical” argument tee hee
the first thing is: they said they’re using australs debating system. okay, if you point it into a classical event like JOVED or IVED, yes indeed i can presumably my argue that it’s true 🙂 but anyhow, when i seen on like inter faculty debating championship like was at my univ. i can’t said it was another australs system. okay, the system goes to australs, but all of the messy’s the system on the time point ain’t a natural australs. it’s looking as hybridation between asians system and australs. i can presume that is mix system (similar as NPDA). but my argument ain’t get point from coherency hehehe
the second: if it’s NPDA clone. it must be noted that for case building until replier still got a wrong time management. anyone who already knew about NPDA system? i believe you know it already. if you still confused with this system you better check on it (wikipedia-red). But i heard that another event like ALSA E-Comm were adopting WSDC system (World School Debating System) which are much complicated and like a mixture between asians and australs. That’s fair enough… and i do not want to take any risky respons into this system because my focus are on it (the confussion system which are adopted by Indonesia) ^ ^
the reason why i conclude that’s confusing is…. look at my result:
they’re using on the same concept like australs has:
2 team each as affirmative (which proposites the motion) or negative (which opposites the motion) , never allowed to have a POI (point of information), restricted in debating, the adjudicators had the important role on it. and the time: for CB (case building) took 30 minutes (original 15 minutes), 1st speaker until 3rd speaker each team took 8 minutes (original 7 minutes), the replyer took 6 minutes (but on the original just 4 minutes). well if i compare it into NPDA: CB took for 15 minutes. 1st speaker of affirmative (NPDA called PC) team spend 7 minutes. 1st speaker of negative (OC) team, 2nd speaker of affirmative team until the end of negative team (3rd speaker) spend each 8 minutes. and the replyer on negative team spend 5 minutes but replyer on the affirmative team spend 6 minutes. but somehow, they’re using as the original one and on the another case, they’re rushing on their “new concept”.
basically, i’ve lost into a new invention from debating itself. but well… okay, thats just so obsolete arguments so anybody can tossess it aside as he/she wants. it depends you said my argue ain’t good as strong as the bulldozer passing on the broken road 🙂
okay, whatever it’s. it was a good one. and i really excited when i knew it (debate) was a good one. you could probably said that debate isn’t good but with english it’s really fun. but well… if you got involvement on it it would much delicious as you taste the salami or tiramisu (but i can’t say you have to be a eat-a-holic to be a debater :P)
so wanna close into a debate? why didn’t you join into a debate camps or debating communities which are spreading over the world (and basically on our country?) love it and somehow it’s not late. you’ve still join and compete in your will 🙂
okay… that’s all. oh… i am speechless… whadda… it made me exhausted. i wanna sleep after it… __ __”
bye bye crocodile ^ ^