Jump to content
fdsdfwe

Aff Bias?

Recommended Posts

I think at this point in the evolution of debate, the arsenal of arguments available to both teams eliminates any strong bias.

This guy has it.

 

There are so many strategies that can be used on the negative for any aff (Even if you exclude the K debate) that make this just ridiculous to even assume. If there was an actual 'bias' to policy, I'd say it's nearly always leaning to the negative no matter what the topic is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy has it.

 

There are so many strategies that can be used on the negative for any aff (Even if you exclude the K debate) that make this just ridiculous to even assume. If there was an actual 'bias' to policy, I'd say it's nearly always leaning to the negative no matter what the topic is.

That COULD be true IF every judge was at least semi-competent, but with a lay judge, explain why your agent cp is theoretically legitimate, cause I guarantee that the aff saying "this is unfair" sounds a lot better than "solvency advocate checks abuse" or "they can gain offense against the net benefit".

 

I'm from Arkansas and a large majority of judges won't even vote on T, giving a HUGE strategic benefit to running a small aff that can squirrel it's way out of DA's, generic cp's (agent, process, etc.) and obscure enough where nobody is gonna look up case answers. Meaning this topic is terrible for the neg if you''re in a lay area.

Edited by Payton
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That COULD be true IF every judge was at least semi-competent, but with a lay judge, explain why your agent cp is theoretically legitimate, cause I guarantee that the aff saying "this is unfair" sounds a lot better than "solvency advocate checks abuse" or "they can gain offense against the net benefit".

I'm from Arkansas and a large majority of judges won't even vote on T, giving a HUGE strategic benefit to running a small aff that can squirrel it's way out of DA's, generic cp's (agent, process, etc.) and obscure enough where nobody is gonna look up case answers. Meaning this topic is terrible for the neg if you''re in a lay area.

Yeah, but neg has access to this killer DA:http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but neg has access to this killer DA:http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

There's actually a large reservoir of freshwater in the oceans, and it can actually be extracted!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131208085304.htm http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v504/n7478/full/nature12858.html

Whether it would be strategic is another concern, but it's out there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That COULD be true IF every judge was at least semi-competent, but with a lay judge, explain why your agent cp is theoretically legitimate, cause I guarantee that the aff saying "this is unfair" sounds a lot better than "solvency advocate checks abuse" or "they can gain offense against the net benefit".

 

I'm from Arkansas and a large majority of judges won't even vote on T, giving a HUGE strategic benefit to running a small aff that can squirrel it's way out of DA's, generic cp's (agent, process, etc.) and obscure enough where nobody is gonna look up case answers. Meaning this topic is terrible for the neg if you''re in a lay area.

Have you ever heard of adaptation? It's a pretty nice concept where-in you don't run CP's/T in front of lay judges.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard of adaptation? It's a pretty nice concept where-in you don't run CP's/T in front of lay judges.

It's hard to adapt while simultaneously reading the generic arguments that supposedly eliminate bias (your words).

 

Honestly, there's no need to be a condescending jerk about it and he was making a perfectly valid objection to your argument.

Edited by Miro
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to adapt while simultaneously reading the generic arguments that supposedly eliminate bias (your words).

 

Honestly, there's no need to be a condescending jerk about it and he was making a perfectly valid objection to your argument.

But if we're considering the situation of a lay judge, that's a whole new can of worms. A lay judge can make a decision on anything under the sun without having the slightest relation to arguments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if we're considering the situation of a lay judge, that's a whole new can of worms. A lay judge can make a decision on anything under the sun without having the slightest relation to arguments.

 

This seems to contradict with your point about adaption.

 

Regardless, I think paytons point that Aff bias is more extreme in a lay district is a good one.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever heard of adaptation? It's a pretty nice concept where-in you don't run CP's/T in front of lay judges.

Exactly, so I don't run my generic CP or T = substantial vio. and they just do that "non-uniques all your DAs" crap, and the aff is too small to reasonably prepare case answers against it, if I don't have on or off-case positions against it, what do I read?

 

And remember, lay judge, so no K's and no theory meaning it's impossible to win as neg

Edited by Payton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generic PTX maybe, depends on how lego-y the lay judges are feeling.

I'll give you PTX, I just hope, they can't find a plan popular card

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neg isn't that hard in arkansas, payton. But he is right when he says reading a small aff is very advantagous. I wish they would vote on T :/. We ended up going for some counterplans near the end of the year. They worked out pretty well. Generic DA's were honestly the way to go the majority of the time. They were simple that most judges could grasp. Dip Cap was like our shit novice year. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neg isn't that hard in arkansas, payton. But he is right when he says reading a small aff is very advantagous. I wish they would vote on T :/. We ended up going for some counterplans near the end of the year. They worked out pretty well. Generic DA's were honestly the way to go the majority of the time. They were simple that most judges could grasp. Dip Cap was like our shit novice year.

 

Oh yeah, it's not that that bad, I'm just giving an example of if you ran a really squirrelly aff, it could be advantageous to the point where it's extremely difficult to go neg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generic PTX maybe, depends on how lego-y the lay judges are feeling.

We debated in Abilene and read Ptx and all 3 judges on the panel said they wanted to hear something "more realistic" and voted us down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neg isn't that hard in arkansas, payton. But he is right when he says reading a small aff is very advantagous. Only Greg Warren votes on T :/. We ended up going for some counterplans near the end of the year. They worked out pretty well. Generic DA's were honestly the way to go the majority of the time. They were simple that most judges could grasp. Dip Cap was like our shit novice year. 

fixed

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...