MrBahumbug

Does anyone have some decent-ish amazon deforestation impacts for neg? I'm not looking for any defense.,

Don't know much of the deets about the case, but if someone has seen something run with that and know some case-specific off cases it would be cool to hear about them. Thanks!

What are some killer pic's you've ran against particular affirmatives? I feel like, this year, DA's are pretty crap and PIC's are a huge tenet for non-critical debaters like myself because so many of the affirmatives teams are running have some serious issues within them.

I'm assigned to find some good recent evidence on why certain cases directly link to CIR politics- but I'm really lost as to how to found evidence that specific. Especially for engagement that isn't really talked about or one of those pressing issues right now. Can you give me some tips, sites, anything to help me about this? This is my second year, and about the only thing I'm good at cutting for CIR is uniqueness >.>

I asked this before- if you can remember it I'm sorry for being redundant. But I'm asking if there's anything I can do with the low intellectual property rights in Mexico right now- it guts billions of dollars from the Mexican economy, severely harms the pharmaceutical industry, and of course engagement can probably stir a relations advantage. This is something I want to make and try out as my first self-cut affirmative. My question- how can this work as an affirmative? Any opinions about it? Are there too many alt causes that need to be settled before this kind of engagement could work? I'm not really sure- I'm hoping I can make a least something coherent out of it.

I'm looking for a disadvantage or straight-up turn on the advantage why increasing US relations with any of the topic countries would be a bad idea. I'm having a little trouble with arguing this for Venezuela and Cuba, so any help- some overviews or directions I could look into for these countries- would be really, really appreciated! Thanks guys!

ARGogate- Just out of curiosity's sake- how did they go about winning that round? Do you remember?

You guys have both been incredibly helpful. I feel like I understand a lot more just from asking this- I really, really appreciate it. Do you guys ever see rounds where the theory arguments on permutations go into the 2NR? Or is this typically an argument to skew the affirmative? It doesn't seem like a hard thing to work the way around.

Into my second year, I'm really sorry to admit it isn't known like the back of my hand a couple things about theory, especially when it comes to permutation theories. I don't really understand what intrinsic means, and if I've been understanding correctly severance is just when the affirmative takes a portion of the plan out to do the counterplan or the alternative. I also don't know how to respond to the theory arguments pinned on perms- if they say my permutation is severance- how much time should I allocate to proving it isn't and how do I go about proving it (in the most generic way of saying)? If you guys can help me out here, it would super appreciated! Here's an example of something I would like to know how to respond to! ---The permutation severs out of the unconditional nature of plan adoption by opening up the mandates of the plan to modifications. Severance is illegitimate and a voting issue because it destroys negative ground. No counterplan could compete if the affirmative can pick and choose which parts to defend in the 2AC.

Phantom, the troll- thanks a lot guys! It really helps to get effective cards AND an excellent explanation of it. I've never been hit with anything like this before, and to be assigned to this completely threw me off. I have no further questions, except this- do I need to have any specific cards in defense out each term that may be attacked, or is that not entirely necessary?

I have an assignment to cut evidence and an entire affirmative response to the word pic. From what I've seen on open evidence, it seems to pick out words like "engagement", "substantial", etc. However, I'm completely lost on how to work responses to it. Can you guys help me? I need ideas and what I should be looking for in my response (any good theory arguments, turns, ANYTHING?). I'd great appreciate it, guys!

I always perferred me some big booty bitches. Rick ross lacks big booty bitches in his songs.

Is this a good case affirmative? I can see a pharmaceutical, free trade, economy, and maybe even a global warming advantage for this affirmative. I'm wondering if this affirmative is relevant to the status quo and what would the plan-text look like?

Ahhh, that's frustrating. I really want to see how they would handle it!