Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


delichtig last won the day on March 13 2011

delichtig had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

25 Good

About delichtig

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 05/25/1994

Profile Information

  • Name
    Daniel Lichtig
  • School
  • Location
  1. I can judge if you want. I've been out of things for awhile but I still have a fairly good idea of how a debate is won so yeah.
  2. I did give him the alternative of looking at a policy type 1ac but I see your point
  3. Look at your 1ac, or a policy type 1ac if you don't run an aff based on war or extinction, cause it says extinction inevitable in the squo. It won't be a singular card but it would probably be better than 2012 Or, if you're neg, and I'm assuming you are, concede the 1ac
  4. The only place creationism has in school is in a philosophy(barely) or a mythology class cause that's all it is. But to be taught in schools, it would have to be taught alongside other creation myths which wouldn't be good enough for creationists cause they are better than the damn brown people. Better yet, why bother teaching it at all, its just a compilation of all the other crappy creation stories that have ever existed so if you teach those other creation stories, why bother teaching the mutt? Also, its wrong, straight up, no question, evolution happened and god didn't do shit cause god isn't(had to put that out there). tldr: science and secularism ftw
  5. don't be a dumbass
  6. You're not the only K-hack in WI. I know that a team ran an irony aff all year and 1 off imperialism for most of their neg rounds. There is also Marquette SW, admittedly, they're both seniors right now, so they no longer count.
  7. delichtig


    Its basically another standard in a theory debate. If its condo bad, err neg on theory basically says that condo is good because the playing field is already against the neg and condo is a way to rectify that. Its often used as a tiebreaker in theory debates cause if its close and you've won that you should prefer the neg side on theory debates, that means you've won that theory debate because any doubt in the judge's mind would be dealt with cause the neg is already being shit on now, which is totally false but that's neither here nor there. tldr: pref neg cause we're already losing from the start.
  8. considering its Liam, cut him some slack, we're lucky he's only running 3 off
  9. This is what Liam ALWAYS does. He doesn't understand the concept of strategic integrity, aka, extreme condo is bad
  10. I used to flow on paper, when I debated that is but I decided to start using my laptop. It is so much more convenient because the flow becomes so much more clear because the computer allows near perfect lining up of arguments when compared to paper flowing. Not only that, if you screw up spacing on a laptop, you can fix it, on paper, you're screwed. Also, my handwriting absolutely sucks so I switched so my partner could actually read my flows in round.
  11. Not a judge but I kind of feel like ranting(complaining). CP wasn't competitive, AT ALL. Perm do the CP includes all of the plan and the CP and solves the link to the NB meaning the CP goes away. No judge would vote on abuse for that spec seeing as the neg didn't ask in CX and didn't read any normal means evidence. Besides, normal means would probably be some kind of relocation. They wouldn't be sent back seeing as most of the soldiers are probably still under contract or whatever terminology they use for soldiers that are still the USFG's bitch. Also, aff question whether the Cp solves case. Make some bs answer like, soldiers will just bring the sex industry with them instead of stupid theory garbage. Also, do you think perms have to be topical? Why did you debate whether the CP was topical or not? That just seems so stupid. The link to the DA in the 1NC is literally nonexistent. I suggest you don't use a card from April of last year for your econ brink now evidence. Wtf with the plan flaw? That's an "oh I'm sorry" kind of thing in the 2ac. Don't put overview in the 1NR, put them on individual flows that they are meant to be on. The cap K overview should go before the line by line just to make it a ton easier for the judge to flow if it were a real round. Also, kick something in the block, even if its just that shit plan flaw.
  12. delichtig


    I didn't either which is why I know that the first result on google for qfa is urban dictionary which gives the right definition.
  13. delichtig


    First result on google is urban dictionary and it says QFA is quoted for accuracy. That's not very hard to understand.
  14. delichtig


    Stop facilitating laziness. He should know that googling it should be the first step instead of bugging Cross-X.
  15. That's not true. In the case of military matters, XO could be normal means for the plan. Besides, most of the time, the Court doesn't get involved at all. The three branches thing is just a stupid debate rationalization.
  • Create New...