Jump to content
mnvsvk

Link Differential

Recommended Posts

What does it mean when people say that there is a link differential? For example, people sometimes say that a disad is a net benefit to the counterplan because there is a link differential. What does this mean? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it means even if the counterplan might link into the net benefit, it doesn't link as hard as the plan and that makes a difference - probably a good argument on pol cap disads.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it means even if the counterplan might link into the net benefit, it doesn't link as hard as the plan and that makes a difference - probably a good argument on pol cap disads.

 

This.

 

The amount of link is less towards the counterplan as compared to the plan, so that's a net benefit. I like the political capital example because that's something that people think that they can quantify, but a better illustration would be with a systemic impact (genocide or such). Yes, maybe the counterplan does cause some genocide, but it's still a lesser amount than the plan, so that's a reason to vote negative.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a second. If something links, it links. Regardless of the strength of a link, if they win a link, don't they get to weigh it just as much as someone else gets to weigh another link to the same argument? For example, if politics links to a counterplan, it links to the counterplan. How is it that some things link more or less?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a second. If something links, it links. Regardless of the strength of a link, if they win a link, don't they get to weigh it just as much as someone else gets to weigh another link to the same argument? For example, if politics links to a counterplan, it links to the counterplan. How is it that some things link more or less?

 

You could twist it to someone show how a greater link is equivalent to a greater probability because there is a larger chance this would occur under ____.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a greater link necessitate a greater probability? I mean, if two people link to a certain argument, both have an equal probability of triggering the impact. I don't see how a greater link necessitates a greater probability on disads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a greater link necessitate a greater probability? I mean, if two people link to a certain argument, both have an equal probability of triggering the impact. I don't see how a greater link necessitates a greater probability on disads.

 

Fine then. Think of it as though there is a greater probability of a link, rather than a greater probability of the link causing the impact. Is that better? You're just thinking of links in a very rigid and specific and formalized way. You're not necessarily wrong, it's just that you're not correctly interpreting the meaning of what you're hearing because you're filtering it through the definition of "link" that I assume has been pounded into your brain.

 

You would agree that Obama losing more political capital with the plan than with the CP means that there is a greater chance of causing him to fail at passing his agenda if the plan and not the CP is used. Whether or not you call that a weak link or a weak probability of a link, you understand the argument that the words "link differential" mean, the rest is just unimportant semantics.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said it's easier if you think of it in terms of a systemic impact. Of course, the arguments above work against a disad with an extinction impact, but if it actually is about the number of deaths, then it would matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a greater link necessitate a greater probability? I mean, if two people link to a certain argument, both have an equal probability of triggering the impact. I don't see how a greater link necessitates a greater probability on disads.

 

You are making the affirmative argument that should be used to answer the negative link differential, and your reaction is valid. To frame this as an affirmative in a debate round you might say:

 

"If the CP has a net benefit is not a question of a link differential. Rather you should ask if the CP link to the net benefit is sufficient to trigger the DA. If you vote for the CP Congress would only presented with the CP vs. the status quo and thus the politics DA would still happen."

Edited by South-X
  • Upvote 2

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...