Jump to content

Munda

Member
  • Content Count

    129
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Munda

  1. If you dump a ton of Burke cards I'll buy it
  2. I could be wrong but I feel the neg won.
  3. Your best bet is to block everything out as far as you can. So during the 1ar he is reading what you would have said or close to it. On the neg I would give him one argument and have him read it in the 1nr in every policy round and another argument for k rounds and make sure they understand the 2 really well
  4. That's just evil to have Deleuze V Guattari round 1
  5. Looking to do a skype debate Saturday, we can flip for sides or you can choose and anyone who wants to judge could watch and judge
  6. Munda

    2NC Off-Case

    Ok so the general consensuses is to not use Time Skew and just overload on the theory debate and cross my fingers hoping the judges understand it Thank you all
  7. Munda

    2NC Off-Case

    So on my local circuit I am having an issue where teams will read all on-case in the 1NC and then all off-case in the 2NC. In one round the team read an 8 minute poem for the 1NC and then explained the poem, read a Cap K, and On-Case in the block. It makes the 1ar almost impossible and judges refuse to vote on theory because saying I don't have enough time and wasting time sounds bad to them. I have tried straight turns but the other team will just kick it and the judges don't know what a straight turn is or how it functions. Please help me
  8. The aff could win if the neg dosn't win the "Are new arguments allowed debate. Also if they aff can cross apply from the other flows and make the story work the neg can lose. Really the neg wins unless they get cocky and think the debates over.
  9. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/40568376?uid=3739888&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103330813311 Please help
  10. Read state good, perm, alt dosn't solve, impact turn, framework, and no link to beat most K's if you dont know what to do. If your looking for blocks camp files have cards they should be easy to set up
  11. I swear if even one ballot is posted with the signature of OfficerTom I can die happy
  12. Using China collapse impact turns frequently I can say the best way to answer it is not with more impact cards. I would say 3 steps beat the argument. 1. Read one more impact card preferably speaking toward probability and do a good extension of the first impact card (don't just read seven more impacts) 2. Read a card that says the CCP will not give up power - this allows you to make the argument that they will not leave peacefully 3. If you are debating China DeDev act the central ideal if you are debating democracy just read democratic peace theory wrong and the CCP is too popular to fall evidence. Sorry no cards but hope it helps
  13. We apologize for the delay but this is the file you want to read to make the Trolls-Day file fully operational and at its full potential. Last weeks unofficial file while a nice try just missed so many classic things like a bottom of the docket and the famous Malthus update but were back (Click Image For File) This file focuses on the great OfficerTom and is not only a winning argument but a way to resurrect a weekly trolls-day file. Cards are cut of the highest quality with over 90% of this file being written by you the great members of cross-x. I have also payed homage to WGLF through this file. While we did a fantastic job on the neg we allowed the great Mowl to give us one card for the aff which is assured to win rounds. I have also brought back the great Malthus and included the weekly update to the on-going disadvantage. Lastly the bottom of the docket has been updated to give you the new and improved Pokemon K. Note - All files will not be made by OfficerTom and PJords. We've not marked OT or PJ at the end of each cite, so you know who cut them. We aim to have these files out every Wednesday (this week is special), but these won't be a huge priority so don't count on us too much.
  14. Yay that's understandable but JosephOverman says it best no reason to vote aff means a neg ballot you have to interfere as bad as that sounds to make a decision. I'm a debater not a judge so I may have a skewed mind
  15. Munda

    XO cp

    I feel like being nice so this is my XO block for my Mexico energy aff hope it helps also perm but I don't know your plan text so I just left that out 1. CP links to Politics - Public spotlight over unpopular actions steers the President’s agenda. Kagan, 1 (Elena, Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School and current Associate Justice of the SCOTUS, “Presidential Administration,†Harvard Law Review, Vol. 114, No. 8, June, p. 2293-2335) The more important point is... AND ...national electorate's views and interests.34 2. The plan does not trade off with prez powers no reason to not vote for the plan and they have no threshold on how much prez power Obama needs to pass his plan but it is higher than it has ever been – Policy motives prove 3. Striking deals and pushing agenda items through the government spurs more presidential power. Howell, 5 (William G., Associate Professor of Government @ Harvard University, “Unilateral Powers: A Brief Overview,†Presidential Studies Quarterly, 35, no. 3, September, p. 420-421) If a president is to... AND ...that he brings to the office. 4. Obama has issued over 200 XO’s they have no reason why this one is key to prez powers. 5. The President is on the periphery – Congress and agencies are key to solve. Howell, 5 (William G., Associate Professor of Government @ Harvard University, “Unilateral Powers: A Brief Overview,†Presidential Studies Quarterly, 35, no. 3, September, p. 420) When thinking about presidents since... AND ...possibly accomplish on his own. 6. XO worse we need to have the a government consensus lead the charge for nuclear leadership.
  16. I feel it is the negs job to beat the aff any way they possibly can and it is the aff's burden to prove their advocacy/plan/song and dance solves if framework means neither team should be evaluated then the neg should win because they have completed their burden of showing that the aff should not be done.
  17. I balanced it thought that was just a weird down vote
  18. Munda

    RVI

    1. Time Skew - They only use it as a time skew make them go for T to prove it is a real part of strategy 2. Deterrence - Use it as deterrence so they don't read the same violation again - the more time on T means the less on case making future rounds less valuable 3. Imagination - T restricts us too much we need to expand to allow our creativity to show through 4. Prison - T is a prison and forces us to debate what the neg wants not the topic if we win the standards debate we win the RVI debate 5. No Cost - Only way to turn t away from the no cost option that it is Pre Round Disclosure solves they know our aff and have 15 minutes from the time they enter until the 1ac starts then 8 when it starts then 3 for cx means they should not have to resort to T Deterrence is a reason to vote
  19. Read Kerry Dip Cap, Shunning, China SOI, Coersion, EPA TO, Egypt TO, Navy TO, Pink Tide, Saudi Prolif, SPARK, Wipeout, and Spending. These DA's are good and some are net bens
  20. NOOOO bring it back I was going to read it this Saturday
  21. Don't know what you mean by evidence but yay the fire alarm got pulled
  22. I would add an incentive if enough people competed but mabey mods would like to give a custom reward to the winner such as changing the "members" to "VDebate First Place" or something like that for bragging rights
  23. This was tried a few years ago and was thinking it may be a fun idea with the new topic coming up. The topic will be Latin America and if you interested in judging or debating please post below. Unless an abundance of people join the idea I had was for a double elimination tournament. Speaker points from the previous rounds will determine the bracket seeding for the next and round one would be random placed. Rules are as follows if there is something I am missing/that is disagreed with please tell me here. 1. All rules posted on http://www.cross-x.com/topic/33919-standard-rules-and-how-to/ stand unless a corresponding rule here disallows for the rule. 2. Word Limits Constructive - 2000 words Rebuttal - 1600 words 3. Response Times 1AC - 24 hours from start time CX of 1AC - 24 hours from end of 1AC 1NC - 12 hours from end of CX (24 hour minimum) CX of 1NC - 24 hours from end of 1NC 2AC -12 hours from end of CX (24 hour minimum) CX of 2AC - 24 hours from end of 2AC 2NC - 12 hours from end of CX (24 hour minimum) CX of 2NC - 24 hours from end of 2AC 1NR - 24 hours from end of 2AC 1AR - 24 hours from end of 1NR 2NR - 24 hours from end of 1AR 2AR - 24 hours from end of 2NR
×
×
  • Create New...