Judging criteria 1a: ** for realists **

Aim - measure and award points for substance (application)

Competency - connect strategy to execution and sustainability.

Clarification -
contestants debating the pros of a government policy should get points if they are able to successfully demonstrate top three areas where the implementation of the policy or the execution of it touches society and list top three agendas that should be encouraged to drive sustainability of this policy into the future.

contestants debating the cons of a policy should get points if they can pinpoint top three gaps and successfully demonstrate its negative impact to our humanities and offer top three ideas for a transformation to change and improvements.


Judging criteria 1b: ** for theorists **

Aim - measure and award points for thoughts (ideals)

Competency - offer insightful and enlightening ideas

Clarification -
contestants debating the pros of a subject matter should get points for sharing top three emerging elements or aspects in our social order that if left unattended could become a troubling challenge. The contestant must offer ideas or theoretical input showing proactive approach to adopt.

contestants on the con side of the same subject matter as above should get points if they can demonstrate a counter-ideal that convincingly negate the above approach as socially-unfriendly and must in that case submit a much preferred theory that works for society.

ogugua88

Rather than complain about headway not being made, why don't we all make suggestions? I'm busy I the kitchen at the moment, but I'll be sure to return and assist Jarus. Others should do the same.

@^^ Wetin you dey cook?

WOW, I missed out on this topic, good idea; I can't wait

Jarus: Topic pls


SNC? Break-up or union? Guys, think.

I think that's a good one, would be interesting to read arguments against the affirmative...

Dudu_Negro:

No it is not. Fact reside in the brain and truth reside in the spirit. The purpose of man is to rest the spirit. A troubled spirit is a troubled being. So for the purpise of the debate, which as Jarus as stated, is to contribute to forward looking policies, then we need to make truth a part and parcel of the debate.

While fact is tangible and very malleable, truth is only an attribute, an ideal and very self evident.....and without which a man finds it hard to navigate life.

I will give this some clarity. Lets say a city issues bonds to raise money for a highway through the town. The fact on record is pertinent to the bond as a loan to government. It is also validly factual for the investor .

How about the mother of three that hawks food to the road construction crew, the guy that brings them cold bottled water everyday, the guy that brings sunshades and eye protectors against the glarig sun......the lady that sells umbrella for shade. These people are not accounted for on paper and no record exist to tabulate their participation.

No record exist to tell how the actiin of the government has helped to redistribute income to a lower level of society. There is no fact for that but the truth of it is self evident.

So when we begin to talk about progress in Nigeria....speaking correct grammar is okay, but having the foresight and the broadness of mind to understand how the society work is ultimate. Fact alone will not gt us there, we need truth.

well said.

Alright sir...I agree with you.

lagerwhenindoubt:

I think it is a balanced decision to handpick the debaters.. given that a rigorous mental process was put to work to come up with the 10 wisemen, now what we need is a Shining STAR to guide them on their journey. It is the TOPICS up for debate we should be more concerned about. I want to suggest that more generic topics be debated on than than individualistic topics. by this i mean rather than say "TINUBU's Influence on ACN Congress" we can choose "GOD-FATHER INFLUENCE IN REGIONAL POLITICS" it takes away the obvious tendency to put a debater on the defensive and restrict the quality of information to one side rather than the BIG Picture

For debaters, Pls if your are on a free internet package make sure it does not expire on 29th Oct, I dont want to hear "i lost contact later", Shymex and coogar take note ,and all you UK freebies

CHESSBOARD: For debaters, Pls if your are on a free internet package make sure it does not expire on 29th Oct, I dont want to hear "i lost contact later", Shymex and coogar take note ,and all you UK freebies

lol ...some people can just blame their woes on inanimate things. Hoe shameful.

afam4eva:
lol ...some people can just blame their woes on inanimate things. Hoe shameful.

I think by now we should know the topic of our debate so that the contestants will start preparing for it and it will give them time to do some research.

Since nobody is suggesting any topic, I propose:

SUBJECT: BREAK-UP/SNC
First round - The 1914 amalgamation - a blessing or a historical mistake?
Final round - Sovereign National Conference (SNC) - the ultimate solution to Nigeria's myriad of problems?

OR

SUBJECT: OIL

First round - Is Nigeria better off with oil?
Final round - Oil and the nation - way forward?

Open to modfication


We have to close this out soon, so that we can begin preparation in earnest for the October el-Classico!

Jarus I endorse the second topic. And I want to argue that Nigeria has been worse off with oil.

Jarus,

I believe the first set of topics supersedes the second set because layout/structure of the federation will determine other factors such as revenue sharing/allocation, etc.

I'll go with the first topic because that's a topic that addressing the beginning of what we call Nigeria.

Jarus,
First topic has all the hallmarks of what we should start the debates with, we need to "settle" this issue that rears its head in almost all the problems we have, I cannot wait for the professionals to give us a history of Nigeria and try to show that it was a mistake or not. It has got the right tempo but I dont know if tensions would fly over.

Anyways on a side note, where is the fact verification team

HNosegbe: Jarus I endorse the second topic. And I want to argue that Nigeria has been worse off with oil.

worse off with bad leadership really.. there are nations that have risen the the heights of economic success on oil alone

@Jarus The 1st topic might be best for this 1st debate cos its about this nation's fundamentals and structure- its the Start, lets start this debate from there

I will go with the second topic because am afraid the first topic might degenerate to tribal bashing. "Just saying"

I guess the 1st topic is fundamental to our nationhood.....let's test the so-called "No-Go" areas by the politicians.

The topic is germane and every other things will flow down from it...

The only snag is that some opinions about some issues on the SNC may not be well represented on N/L

I definitely like the 1st topic, and would like to argue in favour if given the opportunity..

OK. We have enough endorsements already. I declare the topic settled. We are debating SNC.


TOPIC FOR OCTOBER
FIRST ROUND - 1914 AMALGAMATION - A HISTORICAL MISTAKE?
FINAL ROUND - SOVEREIGN NATIONAL CONFERENCE - ULTIMATE PANACEA TO NIGERIA'S PROBLEMS?

DATE:
First round: Saturday, October 27, 2012
Final round: Sunday, October 28, 2012


DEBATERS:
To be decided latest Sunday, October 21
Express your interest and after scrutiny, we shall settle for 4 Nairalanders, 2 opposing, 2 supporting.

NOTE:
This is based on conviction/ideology, not just a make-believe position only for debate purpose.
In the first round, they will be paired, and the two winners square up for finals.

lagerwhenindoubt:

worse off with bad leadership really.. there are nations that have risen the the heights of economic success on oil alone

Which, among other things, will form the basis for my argument if chosen.

SPACE RESERVED FOR DEBATERS SHORTLIST

SUPPORT
1, Cheddarking
2, Afam4eva

OPPOSE
1, Obinoscopy
2, Ikengawo

Jarus,

With the way you have worded the first topic, you can't determine which is for or against.

It should be

FIRST ROUND - 1914 AMALGAMATION - A BLESSING? or you can word it differently

FIRST ROUND - 1914 AMALGAMATION - A HISTORICAL MISTAKE?

Katsumoto: Jarus,

With the way you have worded the first topic, you can't determine which is for or against.

It should be

FIRST ROUND - 1914 AMALGAMATION - A BLESSING? or you can word it differently

FIRST ROUND - 1914 AMALGAMATION - A HISTORICAL MISTAKE?

Ok, thanks. Copied and pasted

I'll also like to support the Motion.

SNC? Good start! I have to get my pen and paper ready.
Promises to be explosive. . .already!

I'm in! For or against is okay by me

Obinoscopy: I'm in! For or against is okay by me

Choose whichever you are more convinced of.

Jarus:
Choose whichever you are more convinced of.

Against

Patiently waiting for this el classico! Nairaland i hail thee.

I'd really like to read arguments against an SNC. Tick tock...