Jump to content
ellch20

Title 1 Topicality

Recommended Posts

At a tournament this weekend we were neg against some team running title 1. We said it was non topical. They proceeded to say that it was topical because it was in some “NSDA packet.” I bought it in round, but after the round I realized that they probably meant the NDCA packet, since I couldn’t find a nsda packet. Did I get bamboozled? Or is there actually some NSDA resource supporting that title 1 is topical?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think having a case supported by the NSDA/NDCA necessarily makes it topical, but they may have been referring to the topic paper, which also doesn't necessarily make something topical.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is where T debate gets sketchy for me. People on my circuit are trying to mix up T as an abuse story. In my opinion (which should be taken lightly because I know little), T is a debate about which interpretation provides the best model of debate. Sure there are some abuse stories on terms of ground loss and stuff, but I frame these as like a defensive argument since it’s not doing anything to prove that the neg’s interp is bad. Which is why I really don’t like “clash check” or “lit checks.” Because in my mind T isn’t about “we can’t debate this aff we have so little prep” but I view T as a story of “we shouldn’t have to debate this aff”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Topicality is argued in Novice Rounds too. Just because it is in the Novice case areas and/or in the packet doesn't mean its topical, only the evidence presented in round about how education/regulation/etc. is defined in the resolution prevails while running T.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah what everyone said is right, but I’m gonna say it too because I hate when people make this argument. Just because your aff is supported by the NDCA/NSDA or its in the novice packet does not make it fucking topical. The whole point of T debates is to prove your interpretation is BETTER than the aff’s, which makes it completely irrelevant whether some debate organizations think the plan is topical. That’s like saying “this evidence was in the novice packet, therefore you’re not allowed to indict its credentials because the league says it’s good” like no, that’s not how this works, that’s not how any of this works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah what everyone said is right, but I’m gonna say it too because I hate when people make this argument. Just because your aff is supported by the NDCA/NSDA or its in the novice packet does not make it fucking topical. The whole point of T debates is to prove your interpretation is BETTER than the aff’s, which makes it completely irrelevant whether some debate organizations think the plan is topical. That’s like saying “this evidence was in the novice packet, therefore you’re not allowed to indict its credentials because the league says it’s good” like no, that’s not how this works, that’s not how any of this works

Yeah but parent judges are probably gonna buy the argument that it is topical if it is in the packet.  Lay judges suck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We read this as a reasonability argument, but I'm surprised this was their only argument worth while. The reasonability claim is that there are plenty of resources out there for you to use to fight against this Aff, and there is no reason you are stopped from engaging with the Aff. It doesn't really take out limits, but for ground loss, it's a valid argument. 

 

What was the T violation? 

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...