Theory about how your opponent should instantly be dropped for misconstruing/falsifying evidence

[Slashbane 0]

Not just that the evidence shouldn't be taken into account in the round, but that the very act of misconstruing or falsifying evidence should be grounds for an instant drop of the other team. Does anyone have something like this?

[seanarchy 65]

These are very different things. The overwhelming majority of judges will immediately drop a team if you can prove they edited or otherwise fabricated evidence. Misconstruing evidence is far less serious and is probably not a voter unless that evidence would otherwise decide the debate. Just point it out and explain why it doesn't flow their way. It's not a theoretical voter.

[XrossEcramination 7]

I mean, it's probably good to write your own theory blocks in a way that makes sense to you

 

Here's how I'd do it:

 

Violation: the aff misconstrued/falsified x piece of evidence

*give proof that this evidence is falsified, such as the original article*

 

it's a voter for 3 reasons

1-fairness-it's impossible to debate when your opponents contrive evidence because they can give authority to any claim they want which tilts the debate in their favor

2-education-you can't learn from a debate when evidence is falsified because false truth claims will be made and they likely won't be about the topic

3-argument responsibility-learning to effectively interpret and defend evidence is key to civic engagement -link to democracy or something

[TheSnowball 1423]

I'd make an argument that it's academic misconduct.