Jump to content

bob hope

Member
  • Content Count

    209
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bob hope

  1. bob hope

    GSU

    word on the street is that you can never be ready....but you can always be smart
  2. I think it is fair in a thread that is in the theory forum to discuss the rational and use of different views on how critical argumentation functions. If you take a position that does not seem widely held in the debate community you will probably get pressed on it. In response to the question - straight up is best - just prove that there is no benefit to the perm and that if its close the alternative is more likely to solve better because plan doesn't happen and can't re-entrench or expand _____
  3. Except for the fact that he's been dead for awhile so the introduction will probably waste both your and his time....and unless you're both up on your spanish Wow someone felt the need to throw a few low blows, I hope you feel like a big man. Cuz it wouldn't be the only thing that's all in your head. Just because he's explaining the way that he views critical argumentation doesn't mean that he busts out a reject every instance alt in rounds...and for the vast majority of critics that you will have in the back of the room. It probably wouldnt be the best way in the world to word an alt, but I'm pretty sure that the rest of what you said is why that either the perm solves or there's the link is large enough for there to be a slight flavor of that capitalist goodness 'Specific debate' - any of the things you mentioned could be a link...he explained that in a prior post Maybee, if your opponent isn't too sharp, but why would you want to practice and prepare for a debate against a team that wasn't that good? More importantly....... I guess I'll never hear another K
  4. Quick summary - Don't go for just a no link on the K in the 2ar unless you're reading a critical aff in no way links or its a K that seems to have no link - even then its not advisable - Links are a dime a dozen Perms must be beneficial - if neg wins K comes first or the way to weigh impacts then you're probably screwed if you're reading a straight up case If all else fails just remember that Ks are cheating brorlob I've got two questions, You say that Ks are just 'ways to win debates' - what competitive team runs arguments that aren't meant to win rounds or complement a strategy? How do you win a complete no link on most Ks?
  5. I can jump on that. I'm pretty sure that iran isn't a place that I want to be anytime soon, unless I have enough time to brush up on my farsi.
  6. Yes and no. If the CP is mutually exclusive or the perm links isn't beneficial and anaylsis that explains this is elsewhere in the block, i'd be ok with it. If its not anywhere and completely new, I'd vote aff. Its intervening in my mind because the team is doing work which may make sense
  7. bob hope

    NHL Playoffs

    because hossa has made a huge difference in this series.... I'm pretty sure that its not going to be a shutout. The pens are younger and deat an absolute beating to the wings last game. I love how you're so sure that the wings will win, same coach you had the rest of the series - a series that is tied up. Home ice and the last line change can be pretty nice, but i think its more about who has the momentum late in the game. Detriot hasn't been as lethal in the third as the pens. They've started off strong, but just can't finish strong.
  8. bob hope

    NHL Playoffs

    *bump* Pens could go all the way and it looks like detroit will be there too, we'll find out tonight. Thoughts on a detroit / pittsburgh rematch?
  9. QFA I've met people from liberty and they're not conservative robots. Maybee not people that I agree with on things that may be important to them like religion or some political views....but that happens a lot. I don't get why they're catching so much flak from people on the boards when they're almost all really nice people and a lot more liberal then the vast majority of the campus. In response to how they have a team - well I'm pretty sure that mr garrett and south-x made it pretty clear that they like to run arguments that let them win, if its abortion good - they'll defend the cards. I think the more interesting part of this thread is the having a debate team and banning the young dems. In the end it probably comes down to the college's bottom line, they want as much $ as possible and their donors don't seem like they would be cool n the gang with R rated movies, people of the opposite sex sleeping in the same room, and a few other practices happening (like democrats at lib) so the school doesn't allow things. As for R rated movies, its true that you've selected educational movies, but what about slasher films? Though i like movies, not a lot of movies are educational. But if we're bashing liberty, I think we should all incorporate this gem into our fem blocks (though I understand that no one on liberty's debate team probably agrees with this) I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They've blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That's all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they're mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They're sexist. They hate men - that's their problem. ~Jerry Falwell
  10. as long as the affirmative has offense - they are still justifying the plan. In the case of the CP, it could go either way. Depending on how the debate hashes out would determine how I decide presumption, but i generally think that presumption goes to the affirmative if the negative is advocating a cp/alt. I would most likely vote negative if the impact turns to the CP/alt did not generate offense in the SQuo and the 2NR tells me that the squo is still an option. As the 2n you should be prepared to do this - an affirmative team isn't going to out of nowhere drop case and go for an impact turn. It has to be either totally mishandeled and the case is crushed or the case is decimated and the turn is your only out. I'd vote aff if they stuck the negative with the CP/Alt or the offense applied to the status quo as well. Either way i would not be happy when this happened
  11. bob hope

    Heg

    unless you're going critical the heg bad side of the debate isn't as strong as heg good
  12. bob hope

    Infamous cards

    readon warren and candy both say patriarchy is bad news bears
  13. yea small aff cases that won't link to the generic 'x camp sucks' lit or run into a hard time with a conditions cp. I could be wrong though cuz I've been researching pretty generically
  14. I'll agree with that, there weren't many wheat or rice affs. It seems like this coming topic will be hard to squirrel on.
  15. bob hope

    NHL Playoffs

    i'd like that match for the cup Edit - Pens are up 1-0 in the series, if we keep playing like we were in the first two periods this'll be easy. Did anyone else think that carolina looked really nervous at the beginning of the game? Looks like Detroit will hose in their series if things don't change.
  16. I'll agree that its with multiple opportunity costs or multiple worldviews, not that any one is conditional because I feel that it changes the nature of the game in a bad way. Its not that it makes it impossible and yes, it happens and happens a lot more often at tournaments like the NDT. Yes, I'm aware of how to handle this type of debate, my question is if its good for the activity. Just because you straight turn the net benefits does not mean that you're good to go and odds are you will most likely straight turn a DA or 2 to stick the negative with it regardless. If one of the CPs accesses a turn then you can conceede the turn and kick the other CP and answer the turn. On the K i'm pretty sure that one or 2 straight turns could be easy pickings. Even if its strategic, the negative can still weasle out that way. The negative isn't fucked just because you have your best answers, the block is big and seems to grow a lot when you can take worlds away. I understand this well, I was on a very small HS squad and I chose to be on one where i'm at in college. If you're on a small squad like you are, your best bet is to truely have a bread and butter position, the K works really well. If you're more into policy, one maybee two DAs and answers to everything that could possibly be said against the position. Couple it with a broad CP that solves almost all topical affirmatives and I don't see the problem. Its when you run 2 CPs that I think the debate quality decreases a bit, though moreso when there are 3 or 4. There are just too many questions about how the different opp. costs interact with each other.
  17. I'll agree that its with multiple opportunity costs or multiple worldviews, not that any one is conditional because I feel that it changes the nature of the game in a bad way. Its not that it makes it impossible and yes, it happens and happens a lot more often at tournaments like the NDT. Yes, I'm aware of how to handle this type of debate, my question is if its good for the activity. Just because you straight turn the net benefits does not mean that you're good to go and odds are you will most likely straight turn a DA or 2 to stick the negative with it regardless. If one of the CPs accesses a turn then you can conceede the turn and kick the other CP and answer the turn. On the K i'm pretty sure that one or 2 straight turns could be easy pickings. Even if its strategic, the negative can still weasle out that way. The negative isn't fucked just because you have your best answers, the block is big and seems to grow a lot when you can take worlds away. I understand this well, I was on a very small HS squad and I chose to be on one where i'm at in college. If you're on a small squad like you are, your best bet is to truely have a bread and butter position, the K works really well. If you're more into policy, one maybee two DAs and answers to everything that could possibly be said against the position. Couple it with a broad CP that solves almost all topical affirmatives and I don't see the problem. Its when you run 2 CPs that I think the debate quality decreases a bit, though moreso when there are 3 or 4. There are just too many questions about how the different opp. costs interact with each other.
  18. its not the same as when you compare the different possible worlds as just plan v cp or squo or world of alt. and when you can run 4 cps and a K, kick out of them and even the offense that you might be able to access can be handled by the block along with your best answers
  19. its not that I can't man-up or have had problems, its that in my opinion better debates focus highly on case and a few das or cp or k, with a ton of depth. Just because it is done or can be doesn't make it the best way to debate. Speaking of dismissing things, the reasons I give for why that multiple worlds are bad isn't really responded to...that it creates strategic differences in debates
  20. yes its subjective, but that's debate and if debated correctly there's a lot less subjectivity. i'm focusing more on the mutiple worlds portion. Yes, I do assert that and its not what i'd say is a good negative strategy is and there is a fairly large segment of the community that would most likely believe that 4 cps and a k isn't a good debate. Just because a good negative team does it doesn't make it a good debate. The trend of mutiple CPs at the NDT is horrible. In the finals of the ndt this year kansas did win, but a lot of that win was premised off of flaws in the negative block. Though the wake team kicked major ass, they dropped the ball a bit. Your argument is that they're 'justjust different opportunity costs that the neg is showing to the judge.' But the debate changes significantly when the plan is compared to a PIC w/a net ben and DA Squo + da K (which is a completely different round from the rest) different PIC that links to the da but has an inbedded nb These are all different impact calculus and comparisions then PIC with das/nbs or K or the squo and das or even theory
  21. Topicality, like all theory spills over like jeff said, but in another way as well - theory arguments create a reasonable set of expectations for each judge. If a judge votes that a certian practice (in this instance a case's topicality) as not meeting the resolution people hear about this / experience this. The implication being that if the next day of the tourn an extremely similiar debate were to occur, in front of the same judge, the same decision should be cast. Without grounding debates in the past experiences then debate loses a lot. Another example would be conditionality, if a judge votes for condo bad then a team is more likely to run it in front of them because the judge is willing to vote on this issue. As for the example T debate, to me it would depend on the DAs to the interp, analysis on the counterinterp, and the biggest would be the abuse story. Its sort of hard to know w/o any specifics. I agree w/the no links, but I do not think that good debates happen when there are more then 3 worlds (squo, cp/k, cp/k) pref squo, cp, k. Anymore and the negative block is just too easy because of the nature of the game mixed with conditionality. If the other team ever knows you, you'll get screwed running timesucks. Its a dangerous practice that can backfire.
  22. I think D7 will be interesting in the way it breaks down next year, there are a lot of up and coming debaters looking for a way to the NDT.
  23. bob hope

    Hard Rock/Metal

    I meant sick of it all / blood for blood are more in the same era of things that came after other genres like metal influenced artists. I don't like reggae, it takes my opinion of them down. It would be like the stones doing a rap song - a very sad day. The brains werent key to b4b/soia, yea, they had an influence - but I highly doubt they would have been very different Swing and a miss on the racism, sorry, as i said above, its more that they had a reggae stint.
  24. bob hope

    Hard Rock/Metal

    No, I am not joking, my comments about threat stay. I think that blood for blood is amazing and I can't deal with the message of straight edge bands. Bad Brains is good, but do they really hold a flame to blood for blood, sick of it all, and a few other bands of that era, no. But either way, I don't think of blood for blood is a band that the poster would be into, so I didn't put them on my original list and just mentioned them in relation to papa's quote. My head wouldn't explode....i've heard 95% of these bands before and i'm still here
×
×
  • Create New...