Jump to content
Nonegfiat

Anti PF Manifesto

Recommended Posts

A while ago I said I would do this, and now i'm bored so it's happening

 

Alright yall here's the deal, PF sucks and imma tell you why

 

edit: cross x deleted my ten point rant on PF. Like I typed it and after i hit post, everything past the first two lines was gone. I'm not gonna redo it lol

Edited by Nonegfiat
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A while ago I said I would do this, and now i'm bored so it's happening

 

Alright yall here's the deal, PF sucks and imma tell you why

 

edit: cross x deleted my ten point rant on PF. Like I typed it and after i hit post, everything past the first two lines was gone. I'm not gonna redo it lol

I’m sure every bit of it was true so cheers to you for creating it

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A while ago I said I would do this, and now i'm bored so it's happening

 

Alright yall here's the deal, PF sucks and imma tell you why

 

edit: cross x deleted my ten point rant on PF. Like I typed it and after i hit post, everything past the first two lines was gone. I'm not gonna redo it lol

ld is liver disease, pf is pretty fucktarded.  Also what is the main reason of your 10?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ld is liver disease, pf is pretty fucktarded.  Also what is the main reason of your 10?

some of the reasons were satirical (eg: "8. I don't like PF" and "6. No one in PF understands what a 'voting issue' is") and some were serious. Of the serious reasons, the two truest were the following:

 

1. PF is designed to be judged by people who have no idea what's going on

 

5. In PF, the neg can speak first, which makes no sense. It also destroys the burden of rejoinder, which means PF is designed to discourage clash

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some of the reasons were satirical (eg: "8. I don't like PF" and "6. No one in PF understands what a 'voting issue' is") and some were serious. Of the serious reasons, the two truest were the following:

 

1. PF is designed to be judged by people who have no idea what's going on

 

5. In PF, the neg can speak first, which makes no sense. It also destroys the burden of rejoinder, which means PF is designed to discourage clash

I think 1 is probably the vast majority of why pf is a bad event; you don't have laypeople as referees, on the field, or in debate.  it's even worse when the judge's decision determines the entirety of the round and not just a foul. 

could you explain 5?  how is any different, since you can run counterplans on the neg?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 1 is probably the vast majority of why pf is a bad event; you don't have laypeople as referees, on the field, or in debate.  it's even worse when the judge's decision determines the entirety of the round and not just a foul. 

could you explain 5?  how is any different, since you can run counterplans on the neg?

 

Burden of rejoinder means the neg has to take a position in response to what the aff says, not to the resolution as a whole. Counterplans still need a net benefit, and that net benefit needs to be a drawback to the implementation of the plan. In a world where either can speak first, the debate stops being one team directly refuting the other and instead turns into two teams comparing reasons why they think the resolution is either true or false, with neither team having a burden to make their reasons directly clash with the other team's reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...