Jump to content
TheBigDA

Role of the Ballot discussion

Recommended Posts

When running narratives would anyone buy a roll of the ballot of whoever improves the specific lives of these people should win?

 

I've never heard anyone run something like that but it seem plausible enough to me.

And if this is a norm are their any cards that are good for warranting this "valuing the individual" type claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never heard of that roll of the ballot arg before, but it most likely has been done in some way. The only ev I can think of is something from a Christian source about how you need to value everyone, and everyone under God is equal. But that's pretty bad, sorry I couldn't be a bigger help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When running narratives would anyone buy a roll of the ballot of whoever improves the specific lives of these people should win?

 

I've never heard anyone run something like that but it seem plausible enough to me.

And if this is a norm are their any cards that are good for warranting this "valuing the individual" type claim?

Depends, is this HS debate where no one thinks to call teams out for shit like that which is uncompetitive as hell? Then you might be able to win a few rounds. Of course, against anyone who knows to point out that ROB's that self serving wreck the debatability of the aff, then you're going to have a bit more of a struggle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends, is this HS debate where no one thinks to call teams out for shit like that which is uncompetitive as hell? Then you might be able to win a few rounds. Of course, against anyone who knows to point out that ROB's that self serving wreck the debatability of the aff, then you're going to have a bit more of a struggle.

What do you mean by uncompetitive? Like the neg couldn't really have an advocacy prepared that effects these specific people?

 

I feel as though you can make any impact fit the roll (if you decide to concede it altogether), e.g. extinction means they are dead (bad thing) or they are a member of an abused community that the aff marginalizes. 

 

I could see it being abusive if the 1AC was:

Plan: Build a house for Rebekah

 

Framing: Whoever makes Rebekah's life better wins.

 

 

However, I do not see how using this role of the ballot in the case of a 1AC where the plan text was more general like getting rid of a racist policy that effects the community Rebekah is a member of or strips away her identity. I don't see how this way would be less competitive than a roll of the ballot such as Framing: Whoever solves for racism better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never heard of that roll of the ballot arg before, but it most likely has been done in some way. The only ev I can think of is something from a Christian source about how you need to value everyone, and everyone under God is equal. But that's pretty bad, sorry I couldn't be a bigger help.

My local circuit is set right in the heart of the bible belt of Texas so this might work laugh.png . But I feel as though it could be a bit offensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean by uncompetitive? Like the neg couldn't really have an advocacy prepared that effects these specific people?

 

I feel as though you can make any impact fit the roll (if you decide to concede it altogether), e.g. extinction means they are dead (bad thing) or they are a member of an abused community that the aff marginalizes. 

 

I could see it being abusive if the 1AC was:

Plan: Build a house for Rebekah

 

Framing: Whoever makes Rebekah's life better wins.

 

 

However, I do not see how using this role of the ballot in the case of a 1AC where the plan text was more general like getting rid of a racist policy that effects the community Rebekah is a member of or strips away her identity. I don't see how this way would be less competitive than a roll of the ballot such as Framing: Whoever solves for racism better.

That always puts the negative behind because

1) The aff is designed to fit under that role of the ballot, the negative's strategies are not

2) The aff has infinite prep time to craft this RoB/Case interaction that the neg does not 

3) The aff has both the advantage of judge presumption to solvency and I/L's vis a vis the case versus a DA/K

4) The aff has the perm which means things like 'Give Rebekah $1000' aren't competitive

5) The aff has the last speech to squirm out of things

 

I could probably list a few more things if I sat around and thought about it, but it should be clear, that of the nearly infinite self-serving and arbitrary RoB's, this one is particularly so. 

 

If you want an RoB that's competitive and fair, you should stick to: 'The RoB is to vote for the team that did the better debating'

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That always puts the negative behind because

1) The aff is designed to fit under that role of the ballot, the negative's strategies are not

2) The aff has infinite prep time to craft this RoB/Case interaction that the neg does not 

3) The aff has both the advantage of judge presumption to solvency and I/L's vis a vis the case versus a DA/K

4) The aff has the perm which means things like 'Give Rebekah $1000' aren't competitive

5) The aff has the last speech to squirm out of things

 

I could probably list a few more things if I sat around and thought about it, but it should be clear, that of the nearly infinite self-serving and arbitrary RoB's, this one is particularly so. 

 

If you want an RoB that's competitive and fair, you should stick to: 'The RoB is to vote for the team that did the better debating'

Fair enough, I completely agree with that. I just meant that I don't think its any more abusive than other RoBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheBigDA

Why do you have such a negative rep? Are you trying to be a troll?

I largely subscribe to more traditional style of debate (I prefer policy plans/advantages as compared to K debate) and many members of the debate community do not agree with me. 

 

Also, I'm kind of a troll  :flower:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I largely subscribe to more traditional style of debate (I prefer policy plans/advantages as compared to K debate) and many members of the debate community do not agree with me. 

 

Also, I'm kind of a troll  :flower:

You're not a troll, nor are you just a "traditional debater." You have empirically been dogmatic and believed you stand on some moral high ground of debate, while criticizing certain aspects of it because they deviate from your interpretation of what debate should be like.

I.e.

https://www.cross-x.com/topic/56788-performance-aff/

https://www.cross-x.com/topic/56427-negative-help-needed/ (throughout this entire thread)

 

one of my fav quotes is this: "You do realize that all k's are just "waaaaa" arguments dressed up in high-class vocabulary right? They ALL contradict eachother and take away from the framer's intent. While they do make more sense than crit. affs, they are the next worse thing."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not a troll, nor are you just a "traditional debater." You have empirically been dogmatic and believed you stand on some moral high ground of debate, while criticizing certain aspects of it because they deviate from your interpretation of what debate should be like.

I.e.

https://www.cross-x.com/topic/56788-performance-aff/

https://www.cross-x.com/topic/56427-negative-help-needed/ (throughout this entire thread)

 

one of my fav quotes is this: "You do realize that all k's are just "waaaaa" arguments dressed up in high-class vocabulary right? They ALL contradict eachother and take away from the framer's intent. While they do make more sense than crit. affs, they are the next worse thing."

I apologize for these instances of both ignorance and immaturity. Reading through the second thread I believe that it is fairly obvious I did not really even know what a K was. Although I have no excuses for these stupid or annoying things I said, I can say that I truly believe I have matured since this time.

 

In addition, I do not quite understand the reason behind this post as it feels as though it comes from a personal anger. If this is the case and you feel as though I have either personally wronged you or another individual please feel free to PM so we may discuss the matter.

 

Best regards

  • Upvote 6

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...