[reuben_tate]

Originally Posted by Xx{Midnight}xX

The call to action depends more so which type of claim I use, be it a "value" claim or more of a "fact" based claim. A fact based claim such as "There need to be a change on how we filter horomones out of our water supply" (a topic that is actually being done) can be supported with a clear cut call to action and supported with raw data and statistics. Where as the one I am aiming for is more of a suggestion like claim such as "You should buy the bowflex machine because it can help you get to a desired weight within the privacy of your own home."

I'd sort of prefer to stick to a more policy claim, "you should, because" simply because as anyone on FFR knows, if I even try to back it up with facts I'll sound extremely condescending. Knowing I am [supposedly] that type of person, I'm avoiding a fact based one as much as possible, just to avoid that happening. My teacher has said that in my class, my enthusiasm has been unmatched. I sort of feel like I really should use that to my advantage. I can't really do that with a fact based claim.

Conceptually I guess I should go with the more "you should play FFR instead of ______ (insert other game here)" sort of thesis.

In both those cases, both facts, arguments, and opinion play a role. One could argue there doesn't need to be a change in hormone filtering saying its current state is sufficient enough or that it'd cost too much money. And even in cases like those where it seems an individual can't do anything, they can, they can write to their local representatives, gather or include themsleves in a petition etc.

As for your other idea, its kinda weak since people can still play ffr and still play all the games you say are not as good.


Also, I have to disagree with gold stinger for a bit. Its important to acknowledge the other side. Not doing so makes your speech weaker two fold: first it makes it seem like you're not informed or ignorant of the other side's reasons and second, it ruins any established sense of character you have by appearing cocky about your position.

The best way to go about this is usually, after saying your main points, try to counter the questions likely to be in your audience's head that are like "what about...", "however," etc. In other words, make your points and say why the other side's points are weak or invalid.