Jump to content
DeinFührer

Overviews

Recommended Posts

summarize, extend or develop an argument from your previous speech. nothing theoretically objectionable as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it really depends on what type of positions you're writing overviews for, but that's basically it. explain your position, extend important things, clarify any hazy areas, clarify offensive and defensive arguments on flows - just summarize what you've said and give any necessary background for what you're going to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

same way as answering every other argument.

 

tell them they are wrong and their position causes nuclear war.

 

and then do some of your own impact calc only make it appear that you win. because you always win. right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i once was in a round with like 8 overviews in the end.

 

2NC overview

1AR answered 2NC ov

2NR gave global ov, and answered 1AR answers to ov

2AR gave global ov, regional ov, answered 2NR answers to ov

 

 

the judged walked out of that round hating ovs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are a 1AR, do not feel obligated in any way to answer the neg block's overviews.....if you dont have enough time, its not as important....if you happen to have a little extra time.....do whatever makes you happy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 1AR should actually decide on a case by case basis whether or not to answer an overview. in a lot of cases you will risk losing the round because negative teams especially when they're going to go for a K like to put tons of link stories into 2nc overviews and if you dont answer their horrendously long overview you've just lost the round in the 1AR, 2nr is going to be all about those links you conceded and whatever impacts they have. sometimes thats enough to cost you rounds.

 

2NC K overviews are MINEFIELDS. scrutinize them and decide what if any arguements tehy made there, that you might not answer on your line by line sheet otherwise.

 

thats hella important i cant tell you how many rounds ive seen won or lost by a 1AR not covering the block overview on Ks.

 

Your response however should not be in overview form,

 

1AR sounds like:

 

The 2nc k overview makes 4 new link args, and 1 new impact arg--none of which matter because of ______ (perm/aff offense) but i'll answer them

1 says x we say not true because _____(make a spec aff case arg) , 2 says y but no because ____

 

a 1AR that does that makes the 2NR harder than one that doesn't. dont undercover stuff. be fast and still cover everything but dont concede sneaky 2nc links or impacts that are lurking in their 3 minute long overviews.

use your discretion and dont rely on your 2ac arguemetns to trump their new 2nc args, they made those args with your 2ac in mind and often to try to go around your perm and no link and turn arguements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i think ritzler is trying to tell you is that you could do impact analysis, which includes...

Timeframe - which happens faster, usually the plan solvency vs. the disad impacts

Magnitude - which is bigger, could be argued in different frameworks, ie rights out weigh (deontology) or death out weighs (consequentialism)

Probability - which is more likely to happen, this is the reason to keep the internal links from your dissads at a minimum

 

an overview usually depends on what kind of argument it is on, unless its a round overview. heres what each do

Disad - usually impact anaysis (above)

Topicality - interpretation debate/we meet debate

Counterplan - netbenefit/perm debate

Kritik - could be on anything but usually on the link/alt/perm level

Round Overview - only give this on your last speach (2NR/2AR). in the neg you have to do alot of 'dont let them get up and say this' and 'disregard any new arguments made in the next speach, because remember, i dont have a 3NR!'. on the flip side, the aff does alot of 'plan impacts outweigh' or 'moral imperitive'. usually you want to focus on one or two things your winning on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, and if the other team makes an overview, how would you want to go about...answering it?
well, you don't really need to unless they make a unique argument - if they say the disadvantage will win the round you say it won't and so on. you're probably going to be talking about the same things in your overview (hopefully). if they do some elaborate thing i find it's easiest to put it right after your initial "round" overview (if you have one). some people just do it at the top of their overview. it doesn't really matter where you do it so long as they aren't winning any arguments on it. i'd ask your judge - there's a good chance they have a preference.

 

and the rest of this thread clearly places no value on understanding knowledge. it's masturbation for everyone, not just you.

 

edit: forgot to quote and got caught up in the mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...