Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


LSK last won the day on May 29 2009

LSK had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

46 Good

About LSK

  • Rank
    Longtime Member
  • Birthday 10/09/1991

Profile Information

  • Name
    Asher Stuhlman
  • School
    University of Iowa
  • Location
    Iowa City, IA
  1. I've graduated from high school debate, but I still pay attention to the resolutions, and I was genuinely surprised that this won. It seems like a poor topic for debate. Cases and advantages outlined in the topic paper: - Economy - Spin-off Technology While these are reasonable advantages, the reality is that they're going to be tangential to the actual space exploration suggested by the topic. The counterplan of "Do the aff, but don't launch the device into space" is far too tempting here, and that's just the first thing that comes to mind... - Preservation of the Human Race - Discovery These two are unlikely at best. The former requires a habitable planet to go to, and there aren't any for light-years around. The latter requires something meaningful to actually find - and if we don't know it exists, we have no way to claim an advantage off it. - US Hegemony Ha. This might be a reasonable advantage, but it has the same problem the economy advantage does - the act of space exploration is tangential to the advantage claimed. - Resource Mining There's no way this is efficient enough to justify the fuel costs. - SETI Dozens of years of research, and SETI has resulted in... absolutely nothing. My hopes aren't high for this being an advantage you can claim. - Threat detection This is the only reasonable advantage I can see for this topic. Asteroids, if they were to hit the planet, could be a disadvantage on par with nuclear war. Overall - I'm just not happy with the variety in advantages that can be claimed. I suppose there are a few options for critical affs - but not much there, either. (FemSpace?)
  2. I realize this is an entirely arbitrary post contributing to a necroed thread, but in Chicago Public Schools, on average, schools without uniforms have statistically significant higher ACT scores on average.
  3. LSK

    We Are In Poverty aff

    It's not really, which is kinda the point. The aff's goal is to convince the judge that because they can't vote for the plan, they MUST vote aff instead. (As people above have pointed out - good luck with this.)
  4. If you derive the topicality from the social services that result from changing the census methodology... that's VERY effects topical. Your plan is only topical as a result of a chain of events; the plan itself must provide social services.
  5. My novice year, I only used two tubs - no expandos - and it worked pretty well. Here's the system I used: Neg: DAs/CPs/Kritiks/Impact attacks/Solvency attacks/Inherency/Topicality/Framework/Misc. cards (case-specific attacks, team-specific attacks, and that one Wind Turbines Are Killer Robots DA) Aff: Case/Case-specific answers to DAs/CPs/Ks/etc./Non-case-specific answers to attacks/Counter-kritiks/Framework
  6. LSK

    Your Mom CP

    PM incoming.
  7. LSK

    Your Mom CP

    I ran Hamster Wheels this year (my novice year), so I think that I may be able to answer "why not" reasonably. If you're running a silly argument of any sort, you need to do at least one of three things successfully to win on it: a) Have solvency. Have evidence. c) Amuse the judge. For Hamster Wheels, there was solvency: We claimed advantages off of reducing obesity, ignoring the fact that we weren't really producing a whole lot of energy. We had evidence: Click the link in my signature if you don't believe that. And we amused the judge: It's humorous, not cringe-inducing. Even if you don't like the idea of a funny aff, you can concede that Hamster Wheels does have some argumentative merit to it. The big issue with a "Your Mom" CP is that you don't have any of these. There's no solvency - the USFG is the actor, not the opposing team. There's no evidence - it's all anecdotal, and anecdotal evidence can't be trusted. It doesn't amuse the judge; 9 times out of 10 they'll be laughing at you, not with you. Please don't cut this CP. EDIT - Or take Mass Suicide. It has solvency: it solves for anthropogenic harms. It has an advocate: the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. (However, it's not very funny.)
  8. I say, leave the facilities open. Just don't use them for such nefarious purposes - in fact, transform them into something a bit more pleasant, like the sugarless cookie capital of the world.
  9. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1901491,00.html?iid=tsmodule The "most successful interrogation" of terrorists was not due to any torturous tactics; no intimidation, no waterboarding, and certainly no playing Metallica 24/7, but in fact due to human kindness in the form of sugar-free cookies, served to the highly ranking - and diabetic - Abu Jandal. Unfortunately, this may simply become an example of how successes can be ignored. One sees this in inner-city education, too - a person finds a successful method of [interrogation/education] that is easy to implement, not a fad, and (most importantly) shows human kindness. Everyone else in the field promptly ignores it because they're unwilling to switch from their old ways; they dismiss it as a fluke.
  10. Sure. - USFG spends $500 million on food for persons in poverty. - USFG spends $500 million on housing and habitats for persons in poverty. - USFG spends $500 million on health care for persons in poverty. - USFG spends $500 million on tutoring persons in poverty in ASL. - USFG spends $500 million on zoo jobs for humans in poverty, at least $100 million of which goes towards helping chimpanzees.
  11. LSK

    well, fuck it.

    we have one of the highest divorce rates in history in the US, and you're talking about sanctity of marriage, conservatives?
  12. I've got a fully prepared set of 5 one- and two-page Ks that vary from attacks on anthrocentrism to attacks on fear of death that I ran last year with Mass Suicide that all have that as alt. This plays well with them - not that you should do something similiar, mind you, but it would be quite a nice combination.
  13. I see this being most effective paired with an argument arguing that the price of the aff is unrealistic. Though a lot of debaters would disagree (don't give me neg rep, I promise I won't actually do this), I'd run this against health care with a Eugenics Good argument and say that we shouldn't give health care to those with horrible medical conditions.
  14. Prepare blocks against all the likely affs: education, abortion, housing, health care, jobs, etc. Also, write an aff of your own, so you have as much time as possible to add 2AC frontlines.
  • Create New...