Jump to content
Ehxo

Here's a crazy idea...

Recommended Posts

I've only competed in JV for one tournament now, but for about three months we were allowed to use cards outside of the novice packet(the same stack of affs, disads, and case negs given to every school in my district). Now almost everybody is running a new affirmative, like how my team cut a new aff on killing lionfish.

But would it be possible to hit affs with only the evidence from the packet? None of the cards would clash with another team's directly, but if I rewrote taglines and rehighlighted, I think I could do it. After all, cards don't usually support policy arguments anyway.

I would have to be really smart about linking the aff to a disad too. 

So what do you guys think? Good plan, or just too insane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea do it. Sounds like a solid plan....... 10 / 10

Edited by MCat
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um... what? Are you saying that you should edit the tags to say something that the card doesn't exactly say? Because that's really unethical (it's called powertagging, and it's enough to get an ethics violation slapped on you). 

 

That being said, editing tags ever-so-slightly as long as the tag is still directly by the evidence to tailor them to specific cases is fine, but you're walking a very thin line there. Make sure that, whatever you do, the card and the author's intent are preserved in your editing. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...