How to get enemies with incredible ease: redux finial draft

      So you wanna learn how at make enemies with rapid ease? Well it's fairly easy once you know how, all it takes is some attitude, posturing and a few words. Now people are fairly easy to manipulate especially if you want them to feel a certain emotion and anger is the easiest emotion to provoke.
       The first step to having your very own nemesis is an unexpected one, you must befriend your target. Now I know what your thinking "why would I wanna befriend someone who I want to hate me?" Well I'll tell you why. No one is gonna care if you just out of the blue start insulting them, they'd be offended sure but they really wouldn't care.
        You want the target and you to have past history for this to work. I'm sure everyone here has made a friend before so I needn't explain that one but you'll know when your ready to cross them when they are either texting you all the time or talking to you all the time, the ladder being better.    
       Anyways, now you have to act as if your friend has preformed some slight against you. Make it small and insignificant. Don't tell them to their face, I doubt your a god enough actor to pull it off but you should either text them a lot of malicious things or call them and start yelling. Now avoid them the next day, don't look at them or talk to them and the next step is very important.
       After a good day of this you gotta confront them. What I mean by that is you should yell at them, call them all sorts of horrible insults and curses. They will be shocked and confused but you must keep it up, the insults gotta keep coming and then as soon as you start shouting at each other tell them that you guys are through.
       Now this is the part where if you were a nice and normal human the friendship would end and that is it but for our evil purposes we must press further. Call or text them to insult them further. Do it a whole bunch or till they block your number. Then whenever you see them, insult them until they do the same to you and tada you got yourself a enemy

A reflection:noitcelfer A

the second debate Was handled way better then the previous one. Perhaps this was because I was sitting down, dunno? I feel that I used my time efficiently and tried to successfully rebut the opposing arguments. I felt that the ending wasn't strong though probably because of the way I ended it. I think the good counter balanced the bad and overall I had a good proformance in the debate.
      The lighting round debates were interesting because for the first one I had the harder side and for the second one I was forced into a debate. The first one went better because I didn't flounder in the rebuttal period. I felt that the points were acceptable given the time and the rebuttals worked for what Was said. The begining was strong in my opinion cause it was a miricle I thought of any good points for the first one but the second one was easier I think. The second debate had a problem because I was rebutting without reaffirming my side but it happens. The first debate was better then the second. Perhaps it was because I had to do the second debate without expecting it. Anyways, ttyl

Debate 2: rebate

Thesis: we support the idea that teenagers using social media is a good thing because it makes them confident, let's them connect and stay in touch with people they would otherwise couldn't, allows them to see news and interesting stories they normally wouldn't see and allows teachers to connect them to people and places that have different backgrounds and ideas then their own.

Pathos: telling people that they've all reached out to someone they normally couldn't have. Allows you to keep in touch with distant friends and such

Ethos: social networking allows people to connect to important figures such as the president and celebrities

Logos: statestistics on teachers and social networking and self esteem and social networking.

The debate: a sorry show of sportsmanship

The debate was an interesting event, for I thought my team had it in the bag but no. We succumbed to confusion, nerves and badly timed outbursts. We did have a strong end though. The beginning wasn't as strong as it could've been due to a mixup of thoughts. The rebuttals were interesting, with the first one not laying down strong arguments that we had made prior to combat the exact arguments the opponents were making. The second one tried to make a good argument but after the first point couldn't remember what anyone else had said so instead insinuated a opponent was wrong. The opposition was interesting as well with their begining being hard to understand because of how fast it was but it was with arguments of substance. Their first rebuttal said some things without any real proof. And their second did a bit better but wasn't very fast with what he was saying and that detracts. 

Their ending was a strong part but it did get caught up on what the first rebuttal had to say about one point, wasting precious time that could be used else were.  In all honesty if you look at each of the players in the debate and compare them for their positions, the opposition won the begining and the second rebuttal. My team won the end and the first rebuttal. So I thought no one really one cause if I was watching this debate I would have thought that both sides weren't strong with their arguments. If we added the timers we would have one but really that's not fair and doesn't count. Speaking of the timers, Ours did a good job on that I think. The opponents did well too except for getting the times mixed up. 

Ttyl- Jack