Jump to content
idahopotatoe

K affs and Perm

Recommended Posts

So i understand that it is theoretically questionable for an aff without a plan text to make a perm on a K, but I am having a hard time coming up with a theory block saying we get a perm.  Any help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 I am having a hard time coming up with a theory block saying we get a perm.

 

The fact that it's difficult probably means it's theoretically illegit. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main problem is trying to shoehorn in perm theory. Any perm in this context (K aff vs K) is going to come off as a no link argument anyways. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The perm depends a lot on your aff.  Generally you want to have a solvency advocate of some sort for the perm (fluid advocacy good, etc.; queer theory and DnG affs are really good for this, if that's what you're running; if not, there's still probably something you can find in the lit base).  It's also helpful to use the perm as a way of reframing the aff in the context of the alt (saying you're a prerequisite or saying you solve the impacts, for example).  Beyond that, it depends a lot on the theory argument made against you.  If it's fairness based, you're probably impact turning that on framework anyway.  If it's some variation on "this is a question of competing methods, therefore no perm", then the neg still has to prove their method competes.   If it's "you can't permute the performative aspect of our speech", then respin the perm not as the aff literally doing both, but as the judge affirming both speech acts as good.  If you could identify the exact justification for not getting a perm that you've hit, we can probably give you a better answer.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But your k aff should have a plan text or u will get roasted on topicality. I really like topicality

It depends on the aff.  If you have a good reason not to have a plantext, don't have one.  If you have a really good reason, I'll PIK out of the plantext and be quite happy going for it.  For that matter, the extra abuse of not having a plantext is minuscule; unless your aff is topical in the 1ac, there's not a lot of benefit to be gained from having one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the aff.  If you have a good reason not to have a plantext, don't have one.  If you have a really good reason, I'll PIK out of the plantext and be quite happy going for it.  For that matter, the extra abuse of not having a plantext is minuscule; unless your aff is topical in the 1ac, there's not a lot of benefit to be gained from having one.

Don't feed the troll.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Permutations from K affs are almost always no-link + link-turn arguments. You don't need a plan text to access permutations - you can tell the judge that both the affirmative and the alternative are desirable and not competitive with one another. I'm not sure that theory is needed for this argument, although you should prep a response to "K Affs Don't Get Perms" theory. Explaining what a permutation is and what it means to vote for the affirmative should make that go away because the theory is probably predicated on some misunderstanding of permutations (and the affirmative), especially if it outright says that a plan text is a prerequisite to permuting negative advocacies.

 

Lots of these questions are side-stepped by offering a 2AC case overview that explains what it means to vote for the affirmative, and what the affirmative endorses. Usually negative teams try to re-characterize affs as something they're not; just have good warrants that endorsing the aff is a good thing for the judge to do. These could be role of the ballot arguments, impact framing cards ("pedagogy/ontology/epistemology/method/whatever first"), or other parts of the "solvency mechanism" (so to speak) of endorsing the aff.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude Jon voss says u should have a plan text so does Scott Harris. Why 8 downvotes?

Because it's incorrect. Whether or not you should have a plan text depends on the specific flavor of k aff you're running. If your affirmative rejects the state or state-centric modes of thinking then having a plan text would probably be a bad idea, for instance, many DnG affirmatives.

 

For the record, I've never heard of either of those people.

 

Edit:

 

Inb4 Miro says "don't feed the troll."

 

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it's incorrect. Whether or not you should have a plan text depends on the specific flavor of k aff you're running. If your affirmative rejects the state or state-centric modes of thinking then having a plan text would probably be a bad idea, for instance, many DnG affirmatives.

 

For the record, I've never heard of either of those people.

 

Edit:

 

Inb4 Miro says "don't feed the troll."

 

dont feed the troll

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dont feed the troll

coach of GBS and KU. And I'm not fucking trolling when I say people should have plan texts. There's a reason k teams were brain dead turkeys before the last few years
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

coach of GBS and KU. And I'm not fucking trolling when I say people should have plan texts. There's a reason k teams were brain dead turkeys before the last few years

*Citation required for their statement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brain dead turkeys when used as an insult is ableist, anthropocentric, hyperbolic and incorrect.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for the 'im not a troll' one?

(I wasn't quoting you there) I meant the statement where you should always have a PT (by coaches), because I don't believe it.

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's from texas

Like many people I thought he was a troll, but when he said he was from Texas and that's when i knew he was legit and not one to be trifled with.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I wasn't quoting you there) I meant the statement where you should always have a PT (by coaches), because I don't believe it.

dude i was just trolling stop taking me seriously

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...