Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
captainli

Need A good Starter Case!!! Novice plz just a few cases our cards would do TY!!!

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,

 

I am new at this debate of policy and have done some research, but not much has helped. Im currently looking for a case to use in 3 weeks!!! Please, a little help would do just a couple of cards or cases. Ty with all the llove in the world :-) You can email some cases or cards to captainli547@yahoo.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you go to the free evidence section you can download the cases from camp files and I know there are some pretty good ones in there...

 

My fav (that I'm running) is hemp... from the wndi ev but you'd wanna vamp it up cuz it's weak if you don't. Like, add an advantage and beef up the solvency stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh... i would go with military... it has some easy advantages. you may have to do a bit of reading to understand the implications of the case but its not a bad case for a newbie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x2

 

 

I would think Brownsfield to be a bit complex for starters?

 

i'm not entirely sure who this author/argument is (i haven't researched the high school topic that extensively), but i did look at the JDI wind energy case, which seemed quite simple to me. the 1AC outline looked somewhat like this:

obs 1 inherency

a. congress only re-authorizes wind PTC annually

plan - make wind PTC permanent

ad 1 warming

a. global warming is human induced

b. wind power key to solving

c. <insert your own global warming impact>

d. permanent PTC key

obs 2 solvency

a. congress not pass PTC

b. alt. energy fails

c. advancing wind energy key - us must compete int'l

d. plan => longterm solvency

 

it was something like that. here's a link to the aff:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?qata8afajan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x2

 

 

I would think Brownsfield to be a bit complex for starters?

 

Not really. Also, it wasn't my choice that was jusst what GDI had the novices running.

 

Heres why its simple: Ugly pollution in the inner city is racist agianst the mainly African American communities. By repairing these sites into alternative energy projects we can improve the situation of the inner city and we have to do that to prevent entire populations like the inner city from being destroyed. Environmental justice is good. Novices are able to use commmon sense rather than huge nuke war scenarios. I'll admit that the solvency mech is a little complex, but I thinkk htat by reading the cards and doing a little outside research, not only will people win more rounds, they will also get better at debating.

 

Also, dhanson, wind energy is very simple but might be boring. Healthspring is talkign about the case I posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Novices should be reading very simple affs at the start. I would recommend a genero energy tax credit aff - very simple, and you still get your big stick advantages and impacts. I would stay away from military affs - expecially if your coaching plan is to give them your big ass heg file and expect good novice debate to be the byproduct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. Also, it wasn't my choice that was jusst what GDI had the novices running.

 

Heres why its simple: Ugly pollution in the inner city is racist agianst the mainly African American communities. By repairing these sites into alternative energy projects we can improve the situation of the inner city and we have to do that to prevent entire populations like the inner city from being destroyed. Environmental justice is good. Novices are able to use commmon sense rather than huge nuke war scenarios. I'll admit that the solvency mech is a little complex, but I thinkk htat by reading the cards and doing a little outside research, not only will people win more rounds, they will also get better at debating.

 

Also, dhanson, wind energy is very simple but might be boring. Healthspring is talkign about the case I posted.

 

That's interesting. I agree--the common sense notations of the aff are good for starters. I think it would be a bad aff for starters vs. non starters, seeing that it links to some representation k's, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Novices should be reading very simple affs at the start. I would recommend a genero energy tax credit aff - very simple, and you still get your big stick advantages and impacts. I would stay away from military affs - expecially if your coaching plan is to give them your big ass heg file and expect good novice debate to be the byproduct.

 

well they have the big ass heg file and since i coach them and did coach them for a month through the summer on heg and have a pretty good understanding than yea they are ok... i mean it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand heg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well they have the big ass heg file and since i coach them and did coach them for a month through the summer on heg and have a pretty good understanding than yea they are ok... i mean it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand heg

 

dumbing down complex international relations structures FTW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's interesting. I agree--the common sense notations of the aff are good for starters. I think it would be a bad aff for starters vs. non starters, seeing that it links to some representation k's, right?

 

I haven't seen any reps Ks and I'm pretty sure it will be a legitimate Aff, even if it does link to one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well now the problem is I have no Neg CASE :-( any suggestions?

 

what do you mean when you say "neg case"? do you mean on-case arguments or a negative strategy?

 

a good beginning negative strategy would probably include a spending disadvantage. a spending disad is generally a good argument to make in front of lesser-experienced judges. they seem easily swayed by saying "the US economy is already in the shitter, why make it worse?" i wouldn't recommend using an "economic collapse leads to nuclear war" impact in a lay round. something more like the silk evidence:

 

[ ] ECONOMIC GROWTH PREVENTS ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION, DRUG TRAFFICKING, CRIME, FAMINE, AND AIDS

 

SILK IN 93

[Leonard, professor of economics at Pace University, Winter, Foreign Affairs, Lexis]

 

Like the Great Depression, the current economic slump has fanned the fires of nationalist, ethnic and religious hatred around the world. Economic hardship is not the only cause of these social and political pathologies, but it aggravates all of them, and in turn they feed back on economic development. They also undermine efforts to deal with such global problems as environmental pollution, the production and trafficking of drugs, crime, sickness, famine, AIDS and other plagues.

Growth will not solve all of these problems by itself. But economic growth – and growth alonecreates the additional resources that make it possible to achieve such fundamental goals as higher living standards, national and collective security, a healthier environment, and more liberal and open economies and societies.

 

this evidence works particularly well on this topic, given that it solves their internal links to environmental and famine impacts.

 

topicality is tough to spin in a lay round. a lot of lay judges are confused by the jargon that most debaters use on topicality. if you do choose to run topicality, make sure there is at least a clear violation. the only standards/reasons to prefer that i would worry about are ground and competitive equity. harp on voters, and explain topicality in an easily understandable way. i.e. instead of saying "standards" say "these are the reasons why our definition is superior to the affirmatives."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Irony Aff from CNDI.

I was at this camp, this aff is THE CAT'S PAJAMAS!! You see, you get 2 advantages, one is off you fiatting the plan, but the other is predicated on you NOT defending the plan!! See, its so tricky that the other team will never see it coming! See if you read enough evidence that says something is good then say its bad it magically turns into a K! Debate is funny like that :) "SOYLENT GREEN IS... PEOPLE LOL!"

Edited by InGodWeTrustInc

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...