Jump to content

I_Hate_Policy

Member
  • Content Count

    500
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

I_Hate_Policy last won the day on August 9 2007

I_Hate_Policy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

48 Good

About I_Hate_Policy

  • Rank
    Unresgistered User
  • Birthday 02/25/1990

Profile Information

  • Name
    Jake
  • School
    UNLV
  • Location
    Henderson, NV

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    PieceofShealy
  1. As said earlier in this thread, it's all about how you frame the discussion. Paint a picture for the judge about what debate would be like if the practice-in-question were performed every single round. Make sure you impact it out further than just "it wouldn't be fair" or "not educational". Talk about how it harms competitive equity. When one side has an uneven playing field, debate becomes less about the issues at hand, thus reducing the amount of topic-specific discussion. Additionally, tie in that critical thinking skills are not gained by allowing the practice-in-question to be tolerated, and that critical thinking is the most important lesson we learn from debate. Lastly, stay away from "death of the activity" arguments, because they really just aren't convincing and slightly undermine your credibility.
  2. Federal Election Reform would be sweet. Judging rounds that don't lead to body count debates... I get all excited just thinking about it. I'm not sure if it would be as fun for the debaters, but somehow I think getting away from traditional impact areas would be good for Policy; make it more outsider friendly or something along those lines.
  3. The disad doesn't have to disprove the resolution. It disproves the perticular instance of the resolution. The disad is a reason why the CP is a superior policy option than the plan.
  4. How is this 1 year late? Why not over 20 years late?
  5. The problem with the government guaranteeing clean water is exactly what was stated above, though. When it's free, there is even more waste than in a privatized system. There's problems with either system.
  6. As someone who is from Las Vegas, I feel that I must point out a few errors. First, your analysis that people in Vegas use a crapload of water is true. It just is. However, I find little evidence supporting the claim that Vegas has the highest per capita consumption of water on earth. The site you give makes this claim but has no sources sited or evidence to back it up. Additionally, you claimed that 70% of all water used in Las Vegas is used for golf courses and lawns. That's straight up false. That 70% figure is 70% of all residential areas. Residential usage comprises 59% of total use. Adding that together with the figure of golf course usage, it comes out to 48.3% of all Vegas usage going to lawns and golf courses. Lastly, the mapquest map you show is artificially green. If you zoom in, you'll that the vast majority of Vegas is grey and brown. It's a freaking desert. The map gives everything grey a sort of greenish look for some reason. I think it's the black streets blending with the grey buildings. Now, I won't deny that Vegas-dwellers are a bunch of wasteful retards, but I gotta at least try to defend my town. Very informative overall. It is true that water is very limited and we will soon start to see problems arising.
  7. Chris Rayl, your post was great at detailing the sad history of U.S. wind power, but how is all of this the fault of the Bush White House? Seems like people just don't like wind power.
  8. Perhaps you are mistaking the plan for their advocacy. If the Affirmative is presenting a "critical" framework, then their advocacy could be quite different than their framework, and probably is.
  9. My opinion? Both. Either option here will be topical. Without the resolution specifying beyond "alternative energy incentives", it will be up to the Negative to come up with a solid reason why excluding one of these would be desirable. Although, to be honest, this could very well change from region to region, tournement to tournement, and from the start of the year to the end. Your best bet here is to prepare for both, and see which direction camps take it. I think it will be both. With all that said, it all comes down to what the Aff can win on. If the Aff wins that "incentive to produce" is topical, then it's topical. If the Aff wins that "incentive to use" is topical, then it's topical. Not a very convincing T argument for the Neg to make when it comes to the standards debate. I see no reason why either interp is better/worse than the other. There's that oh so wonderful "in means throughout" definition that forces the Aff to defend incentives to the entire United States. Expect to see this run against Aff's that specify a subset of the United States, such as the Tribes Aff (only on Indian Reservations). I'm always a fan of limiting out plans that are location-specific. Forcing the Aff to defend the entire United States just seems more fair to me. See this thread for additional information. http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=984492
  10. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Sorry. This thread just made me laugh.
  11. I love Hersh's use of, you know, sources.
  12. As long as it lowers my gas prices in the short- to mid- term... Now we just need people to start thinking about 25 years down the road.
×
×
  • Create New...