第771回例会レポート / The 771th Regular Meeting Report


The 771th Regular Meeting Report

Date&Time: 14:00-16:00 October 1st 2022/ Venue: Hatoba-Kaikan + Online
There were 17 people participated in the meeting.

Today is October 1, and the weather is clear.
The temperature was still hot at nearly 30 degrees Celsius,
but the air was dry and pleasant. The venue was Hatoba Kaikan.

Today’s theme was “Evaluation Contest,”
so we started the day a little differently than usual.

The order of the contest was as follows by strict rock-paper-scissors-scissors.

The order of the English contest is
1. TM K
2. TM N
3. TM A
4. TM O
5. TM A

The order of the Japanese contest is
1. TM O
2. TM A
3. TM T
4. TM N

The contest was opened by the President, TM S.
TM S. He said that several of the scheduled reviewers had problems today and that he was busy coordinating replacements for them.

The contest chairs were introduced by TM S.
She thanked TM N and TM K for their willingness to fill in for them.

Then, the roles of timer, Vote counter, and web site reporter were explained.
After that, the rules of today’s contest were explained.
As for the flow of the contest, there will be a test speech first,
followed by the commentary by the commentary contestant.

The English contest begins.
The English test speaker will be TM K from Atsugi-Zama TMC.

In contrast to the glamorous Tokyo Olympics,
the work of the network administrator as a sober
and unobtrusive behind-the-scenes worker.
She talked about how she was able to revamp a system that was not working properly and make it work again, how she was moved when her boss recognized her importance,
and how it was a gold medal for her.
I was also moved by her wonderful speech about recognizing each other.

Next comes the Contestant Evaluator.

The first Evaluator is TM K.
Vocal Variety, gesture is also excellent.
I felt that the background of the speech was very well organized with a commentary that there was room for improvement.

The second contingent was TM N.
He spoke about the use of the camera and good facial expressions.
He said that the vertical movement of the camera used for the online speech was correct,
but the horizontal direction was not used effectively,
and that more could have been done about the vocal variety.
The evaluation level was very high.

The third contestant was TM A.
I was pleased with her preparation, body language, and the content of her speech.
In particular, the storyline was good, starting with the Olympics,
followed by the behind-the-scenes story about herself,
and finally, the recognition of her importance and the conclusion that drew the audience in.
On the other hand, the title of the speech could have been improved a little.
I felt it was also well organized.

The fourth contestant was TM O.
There were three good points.
First, the contrast between the glamorous Tokyo Olympics
and the behind-the-scenes work of the Olympics,
but being recognized by one’s superiors was good.
Comments were also made on areas that could be improved.

The fifth contingent was TM A.
She started off calmly.
It was noted that simple phrasing and speed were appropriate.
Second was the effective use of gestures.
Third, the message was clear.
It was emphasized that it was good that she was talking to the audience rather than giving a speech.

Next was the timer’s report, all of whom were in 3-3.5 minutes,
which was appropriately timed.

Moving on to the interviews. The interviewer was TM T.
Interview with test speaker TM K.
She had an interesting story about how she came up with the speech.
As for how she learned gestures and facial expressions,
she said she practiced using ZOOM.

Next, we interviewed TM K.
He said he was a little nervous because the contest was decided on short notice due to circumstances,
but he enjoyed it.
He answered humorously that the waiting room was on the 4th floor, so it was difficult to move around.

Next was an interview with TM N.
He also said that he had a hard time because the contingent was decided on this morning on short notice.

Next, an interview with TM A.
The speaker’s speech exceeded her expectations, and she expressed her gratitude.

Next, an interview with TM O.
He told us that he was a little nervous, although he is not usually nervous.

Finally, an interview with TM A. Since it was the last contestant,
she talked about what she was thinking while she was waiting with a sense of humor.

The English contest is now complete and we are going to take a break.

The Japanese contest begins.

The Japanese test speaker will be TM M.

This speech is about avocados.
That although avocados are tasty and popular,
there are negative information about them such as environmental destruction,
being a source of income for gangs, etc.,
and that they have become the “avocado of fear.
By looking at the news a little differently, she has learned that tomatoes,
which are produced more than avocados, use more water,
and that production is increasing in Asia,
where gangs have less influence, in addition to South America.
The speech was about learning that we need to look at the news more broadly.

The first Evaluater was TM O.
Three good points.
The title was interesting, the atmosphere was good with natural smiles, and the speech was persuasive.
The improvements were that it felt like he was reading a manuscript, which she may not have read, the way she compared the water usage of tomatoes and avocados,
and the fact that he was a little hard to follow
when he changed from talking about avocados to social speeches.

The second Evaluater was TM A.
He made three good points.
Three good points: first, the title;
second, the honesty was well conveyed;
and third, she learned the beauty of changing perspectives.
The only thing that could be improved was the overall monotone of the presentation,
which could have been better with a few more changes.
Also, there was a suggestion that it would have been more memorable
if the main focus had been on her own personal experience
rather than what she had researched.
Finally, she made a comment about the avocados stored in her freezer,
which made me laugh, and I felt that it was a commentary that made a difference.

Third was TM T.
What was good was the speed and tone. The story line was also good, starting with the food, then the health and social aspects, the fear of avocados, the research done and the generalization of it.
Suggestions for improvement were that the food should be viewed in a more positive light.

Fourth, TM N.
There were five good points:
1) the title,
2) the development of the story.
3) The addition of specific figures to the explanation.
4) Explanation of the importance of another viewpoint by generalizing at the end.
5) Daring to reduce the number of movements,
which made the story easier to understand.
As for points to be improved, it was suggested
that actual avocados and fewer movements would be acceptable,
but that it would be better to change the facial expression
from happy to sad during good news stories, and darker during scary news stories.
The suggestion was persuasive, as it was about the power of expression that TM N is usually good at.

Next was the Timer’s Report, and everyone was on time.

Moving on to the interview section. TM T was in charge.
TM M, the test speaker,
commented that being a test speaker for an editorial review contest was more nerve-wracking than she had imagined, which I felt was very raw.
The four contestants were also a little less nervous now that the commentary was over,
and they continued to make pleasant comments in the interview corner.

As for the final ranking

<English Contest
1st Place = TM A (3rd reviewer)
2nd Place=TM O
3rd Place=TM A (5th reviewer)

<Contest in Japanese
1st Place=TM O
2nd Place=TM N

The first place winner will move on to the Area Contest on November 20.

In this commentary contest, I heard various comments on one speech, and I learned that people evaluate speeches in different ways, and some of the comments were very impressive.
I listened as a reporter and learned a lot.
Thank you very much.


本日のテーマはEvaluation Contestということで、いつもと少し違った感じでスタートしました。
1. TM K
2. TM N
3. TM A
4. TM O
5. TM A
1. TM O
2. TM A
3. TM T
4. TM N

開会はPresidentのTM Sからスタート。

コンテストチェアはTM Sが紹介されました。
TM N、TM Kが代役を快く引き受けて頂いたことへの感謝の言葉がありました。

そして、タイマー、Vote counter、WEB site reporterの各役割の説明を実施。

英語のテストスピーカーは厚木座間TMCのTM Wが行います。



最初のEvaluatorはTM Kです。
Vocal Variety, gestureも素晴らしい。

2番目のコンテスタントはTM N。
vocal varietyについて、もっとできたのではないか?という求めるレベルが非常に高いEvaluationであると感じました。

3番目のコンテスタントはTM A。

4番目のコンテスタントはTM O。

5番目のコンテスタントはTM A。

インタビューに移ります。インタビュー担当はTM T。

テストスピーカTM Kにインタビューです。

次にTM Kにインタビューです。

次にTM Nへのインタビュー。こちらも急遽今朝コンタントに決まったので大変だったと言う話がありました。

次にTM Aへのインタビュー。スピーカのスピーチが予想以上で、感謝の言葉がありました。

次にTM Oへのインタビュー。いつもは緊張しないが、少し緊張していたという話がありました。

最後にTM Aへのインタビュー。最後のコンテスタントであった為、待っている間何を考えていたか、



日本語テストスピーカは、TM Mさんが担当します。


一番目の論評者はTM O。

二番目の論評者はTM A。

三番目はTM T。

四番目は、TM N。
普段のTM Nが得意としている表現力について提案があり、説得力がありました。


インタビューコーナーに移ります。担当はTM T。
テストスピーカのTM Mさんが、論評コンテストのテストスピーカは想像以上に緊張した、というコメントが生々しいな、と感じました。


1st Place =TM A(3番目論評者)
2nd Place=TM O
3rd Place=TM A(5番目論評者)

1st Place=TM O
2nd Place=TM N