Jump to content
debatesquad06

Round 74: [ENERGY TOPIC] FIREWATER (aff) vs. DEBATESQUAD06 (neg)

Recommended Posts

Guest cjiron
thanks to all judges first

 

First a clarification:The nuke power stuff would have never shown up on the flow and I would have kicked the T except if you look to the 2AC he gives me the link... I wouldn't have gone for it at all after the 1NC except he conceded that there was a link.

 

now questions:

 

1. Why do you have to extend the interp into the 2NR? Its not done in my area so I'm just wondering since I'm assisting my coach (and we are a newer program) so I'm just wondering

 

2. Since you all said that my impact calculus was absolutely horrible, how should I have said it and what shouldn't I have gone for in the 2NR

 

3. Why was his plan text not conditional since he had three completely different actors in each and every one of his "planks"?

 

1. WHY? Dude no offense re read the 2nr on T, all you say is hes "conceded he not topical so hes not topical" dude theres no warrant for that unless you extend an interp, defitnition, and violation, those are your warrants, saying hes not topical is not a warrant, thats shitty debating, how can you expect to win by only just saying hes not topical in the 2nr? The only reason I voted for you on T is because he conceded the worst argument in debate, potential abuse. If you actually extend give warranted analysis, and impact T, you will be the best in your "area" (if that is truly how people debate in your area) if you do that.

 

2. I don't think your impact cal was bad, 2nc was good, 2nr wasn't, you esstenially easily would have lost this debate cause his impact is extinction, yours is genocide. You needed an extinction impact.

 

And that stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
someone said that my strat was all screwed up.. how so and what would you have done to have made it less so

 

I think that going for less flows in the 2NR would have made your strat better. When you go for so much in the 2NR, most of the time you end up undercovering arguments. If the 1NC had a CP like states, then the strat would have been better when you are running a Federalism DA.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron
what about the nuclear power, terrorism (alexander '03) impacts that i discuss in the impact calc, dehumanization/genocide (hindu '01)

 

Well for one its not a good turn I wouldn't recommend it in the future, but you should strive for perception based impacts. I cant see any good impact cal for that turn, mainly because terrorism exists and the impact hasn't occurred and the alexander card isn't good, and plus you dont really have a link as far as I see that links to the plan. For dehuminization, I would say read berube in 97 that says dehuminzation outweighs nuclear war, that wont get you that far and I wouldn't recommend it but If you read dehuminization, read that card. Then when you impact cal it explain what berube says and why it outweighs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron
someone said that my strat was all screwed up.. how so and what would you have done to have made it less so

Well, for one your impacts are not extinction so you would lose, you need big impacts with good impact cards. Load up heavy on case, read 2 das and a cp, and a kritik.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron

Im on vacation and Im using my moms laptop, all of my debate stuff is on my computer in my room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok... but what about the maise in '03 evidence that says that dehum leads to genocide and then the hindu '01 evidence that says that genocide leads to extinction?

 

and why is the nuke power turns bad since he concedes the link in the 2AC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron
ok... but what about the maise in '03 evidence that says that dehum leads to genocide and then the hindu '01 evidence that says that genocide leads to extinction?

 

and why is the nuke power turns bad since he concedes the link in the 2AC?

 

O well I didnt see any evidence that says genocide leads to extinction. I can't see that card being any good though, but just say you outweigh and explain the warrant to the card, tell me why it outweighs.

 

I didn't say they were all bad, just the terrorism one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron
You are joking right?

No, im not, if he cant answer potential abuse then he doesnt deserve my vote, yes the negative did a bad job on T but, the aff potentially abused them. Especially since they dropped it every speech why should it flow aff. By the way I posted the 1ar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, im not, if he cant answer potential abuse then he doesnt deserve my vote, yes the negative did a bad job on T but, the aff potentially abused them. Especially since they dropped it every speech why should it flow aff. By the way I posted the 1ar.

 

I think he was aiming the "you're joking" part at "the worst argument in debate, potential abuse."

I mean, I'm not big on potential abuse either, but have you ever heard of an RVI? Or Wipeout?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron
I think he was aiming the "you're joking" part at "the worst argument in debate, potential abuse."

I mean, I'm not big on potential abuse either, but have you ever heard of an RVI? Or Wipeout?

What is RVI?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cjiron
Reverse Voting Issue

my bad, I know what that is, I couldnt recognize what rvi was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think potential abuse is a pretty legit argument. I mean your entire strat. is based off of how they are running their case and what they could do with it. Debate isn't a reactionary sport, and a team shouldn't have to run T to stop the aff. from doing something squirrly. Cuts into debates on substance and focuses on procedurals.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think potential abuse is a pretty legit argument. I mean your entire strat. is based off of how they are running their case and what they could do with it. Debate isn't a reactionary sport, and a team shouldn't have to run T to stop the aff. from doing something squirrly. Cuts into debates on substance and focuses on procedurals.

 

 

Run whatever you want and the T.

 

If they "spike out of alls ofz our offense juddggeeeeeeeeeeee" than go for T. If they don't then it doesn't matter, kick the T and go for that mad "strat" you were running. T isn't exactly the most time intensive argument that comes out of a 1NC, if the 2ac turns out on the level, T doesn't need to be in the block.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firewater: would you be up for a rematch but a switch on sides?

 

judges: would all the judges be up for another go around?

My schedule does not allow, and plus I just don't want to.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be willing to judge again, but I am back in school now, so it will take me a lot longer to get my ballot done. If the debaters won't mind my ballot taking a while, then I would be willing to do it. But, if the debaters want quick results, then I should probably sit out. It is all up to the debaters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rather new to cross-x, but i would be willing to judge (my paradigm is in the judge paradigm forum, should be the last one)... just throwing that out there, if you guyz are short on judges or w/e

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...