Jump to content

Smitty

Member
  • Content Count

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Smitty

  1. Since my last KAFF debate went awry, is there anyone else who would like to go neg against me?
  2. l0l ggez. Was actually gonna post the 2AC soon but it's cool. I'm not much of a baudrillard/deleuze debater, but I would say that you probably should use a better alt against the terror rhetoric aff. I hear symbolic terrorism would be a good one to access much of the symbolic exchange offense. That's just what I feel though, I could be wrong
  3. You're not wrong. What I am saying is that the aff is usually always locked into a moral absolutism framework on the aff within most LD topics and the neg gets util, consequentialism and realism frameworks. Within this rez, I can see people on the aff wanting to use a deontological framework to say that inaction is universally unacceptable and bad all the time, whereas the neg could be more likely to frame it as 'there are times where inaction is inevitable.' Moral relativism could definitely be a neg arg, but I think putting realism on the aff is a good way to pre-empt any args that have to do with side constraints to preventing injustices.
  4. Last few questions then 2AC 1. Why does the terrorist exist? 2. Is semiocap the root cause of violence, or are you going to just say that the symbolic suicide of the state is a better way to solve? 3. Why do you not link to teleology? 4. (Suspense) Will all the criticisms be in the 2NR? 5. What is worse, microfascism or total fascism?
  5. I have the biggest grin on my face rn
  6. 1. Define semiocapitalism. Why is it different from Capitalism? 2. I know the alt is suicide, like what does that do? Why not suicide bomb the game maker instead of this beautiful aff? 3. Who is the game maker, is this no game no life? 4. Yeah not sure how we don't break down teleology with the 1AC. Can you explain the link? 5. What's the impact to semiocap? 6. Is power bad? 7. If I win that the NSA will result in a global power structure that makes all violence inevitable, why vote neg? 8. What is subjectivity?
  7. Okay i guess i'll cx... 1. What am I arguing against exactly? (More rhetorical, but could use clarity) 2. What's the alt, suicide? 3. What is a game? 4. Does the 1NC take a stance on sovereingty? 5. Is surveillance a game? 6. Is genocide a game? 7. What is neoliberal about the aff? 8. What is teleology? 9. What is power? 10. Why should the judge prefer your role of the ballot? 11. Why does the ballot matter? Pretty sure that I said role of the judge is to vote aff, not sign a piece of paper 12. What's with all these cards about oceans and econ? Do you even have a link to the rez/the aff?
  8. I already know the direction of the topic is going to be more focused on realism on the neg, so if you can pre-empt and even concede realism on the aff then that could be a potential starting strategy for limiting out a lot of arbitary neg args. I'm liking the sound of this
  9. I'm not sure what to make of this. I'll cx in a bit after contemplating the meaning of life
  10. I'm anxious for this debate to begin Also do we even have judges? Might be a bit of an issue lol
  11. Resolved: Inaction in the face of injustice makes individuals morally culpable. My thoughts - I really like this resolution because it shifts away from a specific area of research and goes back to a more traditional approach that LD should be more focused on. There isn't necessary state action so it is most likely going to revolve around the individual citizen and how they act in accordance with what is moral/just Think neg has a better edge because they only have to prove some scenarios in which complicity is inevitable or morally permissible. I don't know on face how permissibility would interact with culpability, but I think events such as war would probably warrant times where actions and omissions can be permissible and not make an agent morally culpable. Also, it's kind of hard to universalize from a Kantian standponit after thinking about aff ground for a while. Not too sure though What do y'all think?
  12. Few questions for some of the judges -- On the Kritik, were my explanations of the permutation and the grossberg debate inefficient? I'm not really sure how to articulate the perm in a way that doesn't sound intrinsic, and I felt like I just beat the dead horse on Grossberg so I didn't want to overdo it On the case, I know my extensions were pretty bad. I'm just trying to get out of a bad habit of crushing case but spending too much time on it. Were the extensions just lacking an extra step, or was there a lot more that could've been done (obviously besides 2AC kicking kateb)? Condo - I know i'm winning a lot more stuff on the flow, but wouldn't my counter interp (idk if yall had it flowed as interp or counter interp since I didn't say what was what) give me enough to get access to education and fairness?
  13. 1AC 2500/1500 Trying out something new and fun, hope it goes well. Need Judges. CX whenever Terror Talk KAFF 1AC.docx
  14. How difficult is it to transition between policy and LD-- I know that they both have spreading (in progressive circuits) and stuff, but I don't consider myself the best theory debater and I know LD has a lot of that? The Transition is actually quite easy, but it does depend upon your circuit and style. You have to be able to adapt to different judges and debating styles, but this gets easier after a lot of practice. Theory is not quite as big as some people may want you to think it is. The thing about the nat circuit is that it's all ball game there, so LD gets a rep of theory every round. In my circuit of KS, it's very traditional and running a theory type arg here wouldn't get you very far. Also, the basics of policy are even more basic in LD. How necessary is it to go to camp for competitive success/is it impossible to have competitive success as a first time LD'r if I've had success on the policy natcir? Not necessary, unless you seriously want to win nationals. I've debated against and gone toe to toe with TOC qualifiers and quarterfinalists at nationals, and really it all comes down to how you adapt and how you react to the topic. You can't be one dimensional, but that's a whole other topic. I've gone to a short camp for LD and it was a little better than useless for what I plan to do in LD. Would I be able to get away with this whole LARPing thing/ and Ks and just apply backfiles and stuff that I already have? Again, depends on circuit for the K stuff. Lay, it's pushing it. You need to have good explanation. For example, I ran a neolib neg and even ran anti blackness once on aff - doesn't matter if you are good at tech or not in these lay rounds because it comes down to how you can explain your argument and what effect it has in the round. Nat'circuit, go nuts. Backfiles are OK, but you should do original research and make an aff and a neg case with evidence purely cut by you first before you head into something else. Does anyone know how progressive the circuit is in maryland and/or VA? No clue If you have other questions, feel free to ask. This is going to be my last year of LD so I don't mind reminiscing.
  15. Qualified in sunflower last year, the judging is decently progressive. However, the circuit is closer to lay than it is closer to a national/TOC circuit (look up TOC LD rounds and compare that to regular lay rounds, you'll see the difference.) The panels are by 2 for the first six rounds, so pretty much it's better to slow down than to isolate one of the judges. I watched Adam McKinney get to very deep outrounds last year because he was a great technical debater, but some of the judges in outs preferred prettier speakers. I speak for myself and a few other extremely impressive debaters when I say that it all changes after about round 8 in terms of judging, from what I noticed at least. If you get lucky and score two qualified judges (i.e. coaches, summer instructors, 4 year HS LD debaters, ect.), then go all out. The only time I had to read theory was at CFLbecause this guy defended the NFL resolution...lol Yeah you definitely get to go faster, but nothing crazy. I read a Kaff and a neolib neg for a majority of my time debating this year in sunflower for LD and it's a lot more apparent for me now that the arguments you run aren't always going to be apparent or known to the judges, but good explanation gets you a milestone. Tl;dr - expect better judges, nothing crazy, speak pretty if you break
  16. I'm only tech because that's what i enjoy and it's easier for word economy. I debate in a very lay KS circuit, but our squad is starting to go more out of state to get on the nat circuit. I'm graduating HS this year doe, so i'm probably going to stick with nat circuit jargon I don't know if all debates go down like these, i've seen a lot go different ways so I would assume it's not all tech but there's a good percentage of it.
  17. What programs do you use on mac? I didn't even know verbatim worked on mac, all my friends with macs use windows on it lol
×
×
  • Create New...