Any adice for first time running a k aff?

[Stjsuben 1]

Thanks. My partner and I are already huge nerds on the lit behind it and that seems to be the big link, but going to a big tournament tomorrow so any last minute tips?

[TheTrashDebater 168]

Just be good at FW about why your method is good and should be debated

[Maury 2446]

Be able to identify and defend a change against the status quo that has an inherent barrier. So many K affs I judge look like this: "there's a problem, that problem is the most important thing, criticism is good." Or: "there is a problem, so we need to rethink our relationship towards something." If you don't have an inherent barrier, then your solvency is non-unique and the judge should vote neg on presumption. If nothing is stopping people from "radically recentering nature" or whatever, and you don't have a strategy to *make* or *persuade* people to change their mind/stance/relationship/ontology/whatever, then I can't fathom why I should vote for you. Similarly, so many K affs identify something already going on and say we need more of it. There's nothing new there...you haven't argued for a change against the status quo, so no amount of framework answers will beat inherency. Because inherency isn't a theoretical construct. It's not a ground/fairness/education argument, it's an argument about the very nature of advocacy and argument. 

 

I have some offense here too: if you can clearly articulate your advocated change against the status quo, you are way ahead on framework and the perm immediately. Framework because there is clear neg ground, and the perm because you get to make much clearer competition arguments. My senior year we read an aff about environmental activism, and we said in the SQ people were overly focused on disjointed agency and lost sight of the litany of micro-political options available to them, so we needed to invest ourselves in new ways of approaching energy, including experimental solar tech. So when the neg said "radical green communist utopia" we had some obvious offense (that's just a redoubling of disjointed agency) but we also had a sick perm argument because the alt clearly would include and necessitate the aff. 

 

When you read a K on the neg, a clear alt text is paramount. It sets the terms for competition, let's the judge know what you're about, and makes the block much easier because you get to spend less time explaining the techne parts of the K (competition, solvency, mutual exclusivity, relationship between link and alt). All these advantages are doubled for the aff, because you literally set the grounds for the debate. A clear advocacy is much much much more valuable than trying to "trick" or "fool" the other team. And if you don't have a clear advocacy, you probably don't have an aff. 

[DisBoiuLIfe 55]

Be prepared to debate the TVA

 

edit: whoops im too late

Edited January 15, 2018 by DisBoiuLIfe

[ICoastalKingdom 6]

ok just cuz

 

A2 Topical Version of the Affs:

 

1. Your examples don't even fit ur own interp

2. The example u gave isn't truly our aff, running our aff the way we intend is impossible with ur framework

3. lmao fuk T/FW