Jump to content
Palindrome

The "No Abuse" argument on T

Recommended Posts

Sometimes when I run T, the aff will give its normal C/I, counter-standards, etc., but stress that there was no abuse in the round because we ran case-spec DAs, CPs, etc. 

 

What is an effective way to answer the No Abuse argument (as neg)? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes when I run T, the aff will give its normal C/I, counter-standards, etc., but stress that there was no abuse in the round because we ran case-spec DAs, CPs, etc. 

 

What is an effective way to answer the No Abuse argument (as neg)? 

Just say that it's a stupid argument it's about the quality of the education.  Also, you having to prep out aff's like these means you're forced to research way beyond what you should have to, which means you can never garner in depth education.  Plus, the fact that you can read some generic counter plan out of warming or whatever is not a warrant as to why you should have to be prepared to debate an aff that is structured in whatever way they are.  This sounds coherent in my head but I've gotten very little sleep lately, so if it sounds like babble let me know.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just say that it's a stupid argument it's about the quality of the education.  Also, you having to prep out aff's like these means you're forced to research way beyond what you should have to, which means you can never garner in depth education.  Plus, the fact that you can read some generic counter plan out of warming or whatever is not a warrant as to why you should have to be prepared to debate an aff that is structured in whatever way they are.  This sounds coherent in my head but I've gotten very little sleep lately, so if it sounds like babble let me know.

Well it really depends...if you actually do have DA's and CP's specific to their case...then there probably isn't abuse.

For example, on the college topic, some people add the qualifier of 'only for non-profit' to weed legalization which takes out 

   Corporate Weed (Bad) DA

   Pharma DA

   I-Law DA

   Cap K

   Neolib K

   PIC ground

   etc

which shows that there's probably some abuse going on. A good threshold to T is if you're running it because they actually screwed you over (in which case explaining the abuse story should be super easy and obvious) or just because you wanted to fill time in the 1NC, in which case you should probably kick it and go for the DA/CP and case in the 2NC and give your partner the other thing in the 1NR.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it really depends...if you actually do have DA's and CP's specific to their case...then there probably isn't abuse.

For example, on the college topic, some people add the qualifier of 'only for non-profit' to weed legalization which takes out 

   Corporate Weed (Bad) DA

   Pharma DA

   I-Law DA

   Cap K

   Neolib K

   PIC ground

   etc

which shows that there's probably some abuse going on. A good threshold to T is if you're running it because they actually screwed you over (in which case explaining the abuse story should be super easy and obvious) or just because you wanted to fill time in the 1NC, in which case you should probably kick it and go for the DA/CP and case in the 2NC and give your partner the other thing in the 1NR.

 

God damn I wish I could hit affs that we're even close to that level of topical... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God damn I wish I could hit affs that we're even close to that level of topical... 

Do you also hate the indigenous, love slavery, and want all the puppies in the world to drown?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you also hate the indigenous, love slavery, and want all the puppies in the world to drown?

Grouping them together as a homogenous whole. Meh.

 

 

Building off MartyP, stress that there was plenty of potential abuse. First, give examples of the kinds of arguments that you didn't get to run. Second, stress that T is about setting a precedent for other teams. Sure, you may have had the resources to prepare, but that doesn't mean that other teams did. You could stress that voting neg on T makes this particular aff team rethink their case, thereby potentially preventing abuse (preventing potential abuse). Finally, explain how there was actual abuse. They may have spiked out of your DAs or CPs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God damn I wish I could hit affs that we're even close to that level of topical... 

D7 ftw.

 

Probably not going to get that this weekend though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it really depends...if you actually do have DA's and CP's specific to their case...then there probably isn't abuse.

For example, on the college topic, some people add the qualifier of 'only for non-profit' to weed legalization which takes out 

   Corporate Weed (Bad) DA

   Pharma DA

   I-Law DA

   Cap K

   Neolib K

   PIC ground

   etc

which shows that there's probably some abuse going on. A good threshold to T is if you're running it because they actually screwed you over (in which case explaining the abuse story should be super easy and obvious) or just because you wanted to fill time in the 1NC, in which case you should probably kick it and go for the DA/CP and case in the 2NC and give your partner the other thing in the 1NR.

 

Pfft I still read neolib against non profit weed affs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you also hate the indigenous, love slavery, and want all the puppies in the world to drown?

 

All of that increases our chances for extinction... which is good since humans left unchecked will destroy the universe so we need to kill ourselves now. 

 

#wipeoutisanimpactturntoeverything 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you win competing interpretations, then the question of the debate is which model of the resolution is better, so the abusiveness of a particular aff is irrelevant.

  • Upvote 4

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...