Jump to content

NeXxet

Member
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

NeXxet last won the day on March 5 2018

NeXxet had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

18 Good

About NeXxet

  • Rank
    Varsity

Recent Profile Visitors

2627 profile views
  1. i like how you put a Wilson as his own team I would add to that list greenhill AK, westside np, Reagan sv??,
  2. we got dumpstered by greenhill in semis cuz i couldn't stay awake during the 1ar and 2nr feelsbadman
  3. nah i'm talking about trump stressing snowball out
  4. You okay there buddy
  5. My gut reaction after I read the 2AR was that outlier won too, mostly because I felt that the risk of their DAs to the alternative outweighed my DAs to info-overload and normative political engagement. Would you think that I would have gotten your ballot with the following things? 1. Spend less time rehashing impacts in the 2NR, and instead allocate more time to the alternative. This probably would have helped resolve the issues you pointed out with not knowing why you should vote for intelligibility, how we can't fully solve liberal violence, and why double-turns/cooption is actually solvency for the Neg. 2. Argue that even if political structures aren't inherently bad as per Zanotti, the form of information itself makes productive engagement with those structures within the Aff's framework impossible because the oversaturation of information makes tools ineffective/they get reabsorbed by the system, and thus the alternative is a better orientation towards those structures by defying them with unintelligibility. 3. You said "I don't think the debate-level argument of the Affirmative is effectively translated by the Negative into the impact debate", so I think that I should have explained that the debate sphere and the policy sphere can't be separated - ie even if the Aff can overcome info-oversaturation to develop conceptual tools for activism like they said in their answers to normativity, the way in which those tools would get utilized is bad. I would basically be arguing that training debaters to "master information" and work within institutions turns them into bureaucrats like Karl Rove who invade countries to eliminate the unknown - unfortunately, I didn't really develop this argument in the block
  6. 1NR is 1501 words, with the order being the Fatal Theory FW, the Robinson stuff on case, then case. 1NR vs outlier.docx
  7. Our alternative is a specific strategy for activism. We're saying than political advocacies that fall within this framework are good whether in or out of round.
  8. 2401 words. It's just the kritik with an overview, then the rest of the line-by-line except for the death K stuff 2NC vs outlier.docx
  9. 2AC CX You have a lot of arguments about how the Aff's model of communication leads to political engagement - what forms of activism do you result in? What's the internal link between voting Aff and the actual, pragmatic implications of solving for nuclear miscalculation and mistrust as per all your pragmatism arguments? Will you stick with the text of your interpretation on Fatal Theory? If the net benefit to gamplaying is competition, what about our interpretation undermines it? If you win that communication is possible, 1) why is it good and 2) why is your form of communication better than ours? Clifton says we can assess Chinese motivations - what does the Aff think their motivations are?
×
×
  • Create New...