Jump to content
rorohany

Advantage CP Perm Reponse

Recommended Posts

My team is planning to run a Advantage CP. Only problem is, they don't have a response to perm. Can someone post a generic response to a perm for Advantage CP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do both when the CP solves the advantage and avoids the DA? In other words, "Any link the aff has to the DA is a DA to the perm."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other way to approach an advantage CP is that the CP takes the advantage off the table.  At the end of the round, you're comparing the world of the affirmative to the world of the negative (SQ or otherwise).  The advantage CP is a silver bullet that slays part of the aff, because it renders the aff world and the neg world identical for that advantage.  That means they can't weigh that advantage as a reason to vote affirmative - they have to outweigh whatever offense you have without resorting to that advantage.  Ie, when there's an advantage CP, the CPed advantage *is no longer an advantage* over the negative's world, because the negative also includes that advantage.  That's not a point of difference.  Both worlds have that advantage over the status quo.  A perm doesn't even make sense as an answer to an advantage CP - advantage CPs aren't offense, they're offense nullification.

 

Logically this is identical to the CP NB to the perm argumentation, but as an explanatory perspective it has a lot of power.

Edited by Squirrelloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, a perm wouldn't make too much sense. A perm is redundant because both the case and the CP claim the same impact, so the real net effect on the impact calc for either team is zero. And how can I, if I'm Aff, solve the advantage when it's already solved through the plan? In a way, it's just a way to tank the advantage, and then really no one can claim it. It also kind of limits your strategy, because then you cant IFL or Impact Turn the advantage. To me, an advantage CP is a waste of time. But also, by the same logic, this also limits their offense because then they can't do the same to you, as then it reciprocates to the Aff, but in reality, the CP makes the net effect zero as a voter. Even if I impact turn them, and impact turn myself, we still have the same impacts.

 

Why do both when the CP solves the advantage and avoids the DA? In other words, "Any link the aff has to the DA is a DA to the perm."

This is also a really good point, but not foolproof. This is really the only benefit to the CP because, honestly, if I was Aff, and I had more than 1 advantage, I would argue that the solving more than one impact is a net benefit to the CP, as the CP or the SQ  can't solve it. Also, it seems weird to have a DA on the case, and an advantage CP because the DA presumes you're defending the SQ and the CP is an advocacy for something beyond the status quo. Only real way I guess you get around that is by saying the DA is only brought about by the plan, and (in whatever damned way the CP plan text would be worded) would be avoided.

 

One way I could see this working against the Neg is if they sort of run a CP that is based on a case from the topic. Ex: If they run backdoors, and I advocate we disclose zero days (and we would argue that ZDs are untopical, but let's not think about it, it's beside the point) then it opens the Aff up to claim ground from DA's that would normally be ran on Neg against that Aff. You could both try and claim tech sector->Econ->War or whatever you want, but you just give them more ground. And actually, you could uniquely impact turn the CP with good internal links on the DA or other things. I'm not sure if this is even how an advantage CP works, as I've never seen one. 

 

Other thing to note, assuming they just claim a random action to solve the impact, is competitive equity. A CP should have something to do with the concept of the Aff or the resolution, or some of their ground, because if they don't, its unfair because they could pull literally anything from the realm that isn't topical. It kills education because you just boil it down to the impacts, as the unpredictability makes it hard to prepare and argue the logistics of the CP. Also pulls focus away from the topic and resolution because they run an arbitrary CP to come to the same impact conclusion as the Aff, and it side steps the job of the Neg, which is to argue the ramifications of the plan, and defend the status quo. This is just an idea though (yet again, I'm not even sure if this is how a advantage CP works, just guessing, don't flame me)

 

Too Long, Didn't Read: The perm is redundant for the Aff to even claim, the CP only voids the impacts for both sides, and the CP is stupid theory.
 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This is also a really good point, but not foolproof. This is really the only benefit to the CP because, honestly, if I was Aff, and I had more than 1 advantage, I would argue that the solving more than one impact is a net benefit to the CP, as the CP or the SQ  can't solve it. Also, it seems weird to have a DA on the case, and an advantage CP because the DA presumes you're defending the SQ and the CP is an advocacy for something beyond the status quo. Only real way I guess you get around that is by saying the DA is only brought about by the plan, and (in whatever damned way the CP plan text would be worded) would be avoided.

 

As long as the CP doesn't link to the DA, I dont see why not. Thats the entire point of Net Bens. For example, last year, Offshore Wind was a common aff. They'd claim a warming advantage, so we read an Electricity DA (Electricity price low, OSW increases it, kills econ, econ -> war), and a Nuclear CP. It still solved part of the aff, then you just have to weigh the DA against the rest. In other words, DA =/= Defense of SQ. Not always, anyways. This gives you an offensive reason to prefer the CP over the aff.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the CP doesn't link to the DA, I dont see why not. Thats the entire point of Net Bens. For example, last year, Offshore Wind was a common aff. They'd claim a warming advantage, so we read an Electricity DA (Electricity price low, OSW increases it, kills econ, econ -> war), and a Nuclear CP. It still solved part of the aff, then you just have to weigh the DA against the rest. In other words, DA =/= Defense of SQ. Not always, anyways. This gives you an offensive reason to prefer the CP over the aff.

Yea, you're right. I had a similar type thing. I always ran EMFs DA (a thing about fiber optic energy cables) on energy cases. You could easily avoid it by running a onshore CP. But there can be downsides to CPs that take a different approach to the same problem. I ran Aquaculture last year, and we would continually be hit by onshore CPs and Aquaculture bad DAs (environment harms) but I always argued that the CP doesn't solve the DAs, and I ran a regulations Aff, and I would read DAs against the onshore, and I would argue that the DAs are right, and we had solvency on regulations solve that. The CP can't solve because the main issues with Aquaculture is offshore, so the voting Neg for the CP means that you don't address the problem and it continues to proliferate. You might solve the lack of food with the CP, but you don't address the harms of the environment. You can apply this sort of concept on a lot of Affs.

 

If I say that Backdoors hurt the economy, and you run a CP on closing zero days, then you still don't address the problem of backdoors, you just address a singular impact, and in a way, the impact still exist as the Aff could be an alt cause. This still works into the way of the impact calc (which we're both in agreement on), but it just shows that the CP isn't always useful because there are other impacts, and if you link/impact turn the DAs, then you're good (and most common cases don't have trouble answering the DAs) Honestly, we have a similar strategic understanding of how this can be useful, but I personally think it's more of a downside.

 

This is just my piece about it. Obviously there's no foolproof strat, and there is always possible downsides to them, I just think that advantage based CPs are much more likely to fail compared to some other strategies. Probably biased too because I am not a big fan of CPs as a whole. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful that they don't claim double solvency from the perm - that's the only real source of offense from a perm on an advantage CP, as squirrel noted.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perm do both- links to the net benefit

perm do cp- severance and say why the cp competes

any other perm that does the aff links to the net benefit as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perm do both- links to the net benefit

perm do cp- severance and say why the cp competes

any other perm that does the aff links to the net benefit as well

How is that a perm though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perm do the cp is a common perm made against process and agent cp's saying that the cp is a way the aff could be done, so we should just do the counterplan instead of the aff. as neg, you have to win that the cp is competetive and not doing the aff. you should also be making the argument that the permutation is severance, as the perm doesnt include their original aff. if youre running an advantage cp, you shouldnt have to worry about this. But if you face this perm, just say the cp is not doing the aff and the perm is severing out of the 1ac

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...