Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Da4days

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Name
  • School
    Kappa high
  1. Do you have your teaching certificate? If so I believe my school is looking for a coach, pm me if your interested. (Located south Fort Worth, Hulen area)
  2. The only Topicality file you'll ever need, best impact ever Nah but for real, impacts on other rounds is a pretty weak argument, most judges I know won't vote on it. Topicality doesn't really need a impact, all you have to do is convince the judge that the round in unfair in someway. Also I would probably answer you points by pointing out the Wiki and how it influences the community. All the regional rounds i've been at, ive upload onto the wiki so just because its not a ToC final round doesn't mean it wont affect the community. Second point isnt necessarily true, ive seen affs that weren't touched at camps gain a major foothold in the debate scene after they were ran at a major tourney (GBtL this year is a prime example) Your to topical.docx
  3. Please, science has empirically proven that world is actually a set of 3 identical Scherk surfaces that coalesce into a pyramid. Sure the world has four sides, Rays math was correct here, but what he didnt take into account was the fact that in math, we count ceilings and floors as walls. This can clearly be seen in other mathematical pursuits such as real estate. John Williams, Person who writes about stuff and such, "Calculating Square Feet in a Home," No Publication, http://www.propex.com/C_G_calcsf2.htm, 1/45/ 15 Rest assured, everyone involved does sympathize with you. Also rest assured that the house is not being penalized for having some of the finished living space in the basement (below grade area). Indeed, everyone is conscious of the issues involved. As home sellers and homebuyers become more savvy, all have become aware that square footage is a key factor in the sales price. Understandably then, the seller wants as much counted as possible while buyers do not want to pay for something they didn’t get. So, while the whole process is confusing and appears arbitrary, there actually is a method to the madness. What started the whole business was the Federal National Mortgage Association, which goes by the acronym FNMA, but which some creative Washington wit has dubbed "Fannie Mae." Fannie Mae is the reason that you can easily sell or buy a house. Why? Because this quasi-governmental organization was established to buy individual mortgage notes from lending institutions and then package blocks of mortgages into single securities instruments for sale to investors. But, to be able to do this, the entire lending industry had to change the individualistic way it did business. That is, in the "old days," mortgage loans were made primarily by Savings and Loan institutions which were operated from one location in the community and had long-term staff and officers who knew the community very intimately. Each of these S&Ls made loans based upon their own loan standards and as often as not, their personal knowledge of the borrowers. The S&L made loans and kept them on the books for 20 or 30 years. Therefore, unless deposits grew, the number of loans any one S&L could make was limited. Then Fannie Mae came along and said, "we’ll buy your loans, thus returning your capital (at a profit) so you can go out and make other loans"--Practically an instant success because this made mortgage loans available on an unprecedented scale. This in turn made it easier to buy and sell houses and the real estate industry was transformed; this included the birth of the residential appraisal industry as we know it today. However, there was a price to pay. In order to package mortgage notes into a homogeneous block, all had to be written using the same guidelines for loan-to-value ratios, for income ratios, for credit worthiness, and for how a house was measured, and so forth. Thus the phrase conforming loan was created. Don’t confuse this with conventional loan. The phrase conventional loan is used to indicate that the loan is not FHA or VA backed. So, Fannie Mae, not knowing a barn from a basement, asked the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) how to measure square footage. ANSI said, in effect, OK, since the majority of basements in the USA are surrounded with dirt (below grade), and have no windows, they are basements regardless of what’s there and we don’t care if there are exceptions because we want a one-size-fits-all standard." Therefore, everything above grade was to be counted as Heated Living Area (HLA) if finished (walls, floor, and ceiling), heated from the same source, and is all connected. How to measure these areas was made relatively easy. Measure around the perimeter and include everything inside; halls and closets, even the dead space inside the studwalls. Above grade laundry rooms and furnace rooms are included as long as they are heated, finished, and attached. The stairway from the first floor to the second is basically counted twice, once for each floor; the way to conceptualize this is to think of the stairs as part of the second floor and think of the space below the stairs as storage for the first floor—the important criterion is that both spaces can be used (ignore the fact that there is not much useable space at the back of the understair area). Following this logic, atriums or two story open areas next to stairs can be only be used for one of the floors, so these areas are only counted once. Apply the same yardstick to cathedral and vaulted ceilings. This is basically how everyone measures HLA. Note that while some of this might not seem to make sense, the idea was, make it as simple as possible. If, for example, we measure studwall cavities for everyone, then everyone gets the same credit. Now, while there are some other minor "how-to’s", if you understand the above, you have mastered the basics. However, just when you thought it was getting simple, we move on to the so-called bonus room over a garage or in an attic. Just like basements, homeowners and builders "discovered" that these areas provide cheap ways to expand space. So, the first criterion for including this space is whether or not it is accessible through finished space. If not, it’s not part of the counted square footage, but rather, is a bonus room. Then getting past that, comes the issue of height—less than 84" (seven feet) and it’s bonus area, not heated living area. That part is pretty logical; any thing under seven feet and you would feel like you are in cave. There is also a certain logic here; buyers will look at a low ceiling area and say, "whoa, I don’t like that, I may buy the house, but I’m not going to pay full market value for that portion." However, here’s the hard part. Attic areas and rooms over garages have sloped ceilings. According to ANSI and some State Real Estate Commission guidelines, the average height of the room has to be at least seven feet. In other words, get out your high school geometry text book. Here’s the problem: (a) the flat part of the ceiling is generally eight feet, ( the side walls are generally five feet, and © the sloped part obviously then goes from five feet to eight feet. Now, all the agent or appraiser has to do is come up with the answer. Right? We won’t torture you with the figuring out the "answer" because there is not any one easy answer. The important concern is that everything depends on the pitch of the roof. Given two rooms with the same floor plan, but with different slopes (pitch), one room could be included in Heated Living Area, while the other would only be as counted as a bonus room. Why? Because the steeper the pitch, the more area there will be over seven feet. So, what’s a Real Estate agent or Appraiser to do? Well, if the agent works in an area where the rule is rigidly applied and he or she ends up with a "bonus" room instead of space added to the advertised square footage, he or she bites the bullet, cringes, and tells the soon-to-be unhappy homeowners they have 264 square feet less than they thought. On the other hand, your happy-go-lucky Appraiser does not have the same dilemma because he or she has more latitude (within the access and height constraints) to use judgment and determine whether the room’s functional utility makes it a bonus room or part of the heated living area (this goes back to the "whoa, this feels like a cave" concept). The vast majority of Appraisers are not going to split hairs on this issue and will include most so-called bonus rooms (but not all) in total heated living area. Now, getting back to standardizing loans, Fannie Mae also devised a form that was to be used for all conforming loans. This form is the cause of the above grade/below grade debate. It is called a Uniform Residential Appraisal Report (URAR). The URAR, the primary form used by appraisers and mortgage lenders to define and value a residential property, is two 14 inch pages. Approximately half of the second page is devoted to physical descriptions of your property and three other properties we will use for comparison purposes. Of this space, approximately ½ inch is devoted to describing below grade space. In other words, the appraiser is not encouraged to focus on below grade spaces. However, don’t worry; appraisers have gotten pretty creative when using that ½ inch to describe finished basement areas. This philosophy that the basement doesn’t count much works OK in the north where land tends to be flat and basement areas tended to be there only because frost lines required digging deep foundations--nice place to put the furnace and washing machine (the mother-in-law came later). In flat areas of the south and west, there is no issue because basements generally are not built. However, in areas that are not flat, basement walls tend to be half below grade and half above grade (typically called walkout or daylight basements—yet they are still thought of as basements by ANSI and Fannie Mae. But, things have changed from the infamous paneled basement rec room that homeowners added in the 50s and 60s. Builders have decided that below grade space is too precious to devote to a furnace and washer/dryer; so, now in goes window wells to create sunlight, a bedroom, bath, and family room—all of quality equal to the above grade space. Thus the debates: Appraisers have to use the URAR; real estate agents do not. So historically, agents have generally taken the common sense approach and said, "well, its finished and I’m counting it." Then, because Fannie Mae says so, the appraiser comes along and uncounts it. No wonder buyers and sellers ask that question, what do you mean it doesn’t count? Actually, there is no real debate. Both Real Estate agents and Appraisers are trained to determine market value of a given home by looking for at least three homes that sold recently that are as similar to the subject as possible. These recent sales are called comparables—comps for short. The ideal comp is exactly the same (age, number of stories, garage, lot size, neighborhood, and so on). Of course, the perfect comp does not exist, but that is where the art comes in. Now, getting back to the finished basement and bonus areas. Competent Appraisers and Real Estate agents will look for comparables with similar areas above and below grade. And, ideally both used the same comps. They just add the space up differently. An appraiser will look closely at the 2000 square feet that the real estate agent advertised, see that it is 1000 square feet with one story above grade, 1000 square feet below grade, and will look for one story comps that have above and below grade finished space (and will not use a two story comp with only above grade finished space). So, while the Appraiser keeps slicing apples, but the Real Estate agent has been peeling oranges, just think of it as two different cooks mixing up the same fruit salad—it all fits in the same sized bowl. Taking this into account it is fairly easy to see that the world must be a Pyramid. And with this knowledge we can assume that spreading cubist logic ignores the time pyramid creation truth, this in turn lobotomised your mind and creates a android mentality. Please stop spreading the lies of Ray Gene, he is actually an agent of the state, sent to hide the truths of the pyramid. The government obviously knows the truth, why else would they put a giant pyramid on the back of the dollar bill? They are obviously taunting us, and the gap between the top and the bottom represents the gap in knowledge that exist between the gov. and its citizens.
  4. Agree with: Cap, death good (ligotti), Democracy/Rights bad, Fight club (only relating to debate, not the entire world), a little bit of Foucault. Disagree with: Afro-permission/ most race/ queer terrorist/ Ableism
  5. Da4days

    u kno how we rock

    This is the whitest music ive ever heard.
  6. Da4days

    2016 UIL State

    Me, and im praying that I dont face you till at least day 2. If I do though, I will be running Dada, you have been warned.
  7. Geographic limitations are best – the majority of courts and treaties determine domestic and foreign surveillance by location Ashley Deeks (Associate Professor of Law at the University of Virginia, Senior Fellow, Center for National Security Law J.D., University of Chicago Law School, 1998) 2015 “An International Legal Framework for Surveillance” 55 VA. J. INT’L L. 2015, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2490700 The concept of peacetime espionage or spying encompasses a wide range of clandestine government activities.8 It includes the use of human sources to obtain information of interest to the governments for which those sources work. It includes the wiretapping of the cell phones of foreign nationals suspected of terrorist activity. It includes the use of satellite imagery to detect activities at another state’s nuclear facilities or mass atrocities during a civil war. And it includes efforts to obtain greater knowledge about other states’ military capabilities.9 Electronic surveillance has a decades-long history, and from its inception it was used both to facilitate war-fighting and to assist diplomats in assessing each other’s plans.10 As early as 1950, the United States undertook electronic surveillance not just against foreign governments but also against foreign nationals.11 Nevertheless, a survey of the subjects of collection until recently seems heavily weighted toward governmental actors.12 Although “espionage” in the colloquial sense encompasses a wide range of collection activity, it is in the area of electronic surveillance that international law is most under pressure, and in which we are most likely to witness developments. The idea that one state sends undercover operatives overseas to spy on foreign government actions and to recruit foreign officials is not of particular interest to the general public or human rights and civil liberties advocates, although it is of intense interest to governments themselves. And because human intelligence collection is more costly, time-intensive, and detectable, there is a lower likelihood that international law will begin to regulate human intelligence collection. As a result, this Article is focused on the category of spying that consists of foreign surveillance. “Foreign surveillance” here refers to the clandestine surveillance by one state during peacetime of the communications of another state’s officials or citizens (who are located outside the surveilling state’s territory) using electronic means, including cyber-monitoring, telecommunications monitoring, satellites, or drones. Foreign surveillance is comprised of two types of surveillance: “transnational surveillance” and “extraterritorial surveillance.”13 Transnational surveillance refers to the surveillance of communications that cross state borders, including those that begin and end overseas but incidentally pass through the collecting state. Extraterritorial surveillance refers to the surveillance of communications that take place entirely overseas. For example, if Australia intercepted a phone call between two French nationals that was routed through a German cell tower, this would be extraterritorial surveillance. In contrast, surveillance that takes place on the surveilling state’s territory (“domestic surveillance”) against either that state’s nationals or any other individual physically present in that state generally would be regulated by the ICCPR, as discussed below.14 This Article focuses predominately on transnational and extraterritorial surveillance, arguing that states should close the gap between the ways in which they regulate the two. This taxonomy of communications is not the only possible way to think about the issue. This Article’s approach focuses on the location of the individuals who are engaged in the communications. An alternative approach could focus on the place at which the communication itself is intercepted. Under that approach, communications that incidentally pass through a state would be treated as “domestic communications” if the state intercepted them in its own territory, even though the sender and recipient of the communications are located overseas. Some of the human rights bodies currently seized with surveillance questions may begin to use the communication itself as the unit of analysis, rather than the location of the communicators. I use the individual as the unit of analysis because courts and treaty bodies to date primarily have focused on the location of the individual claiming a particular human right.15 Nevertheless, it is worth recognizing that states and human rights bodies may eventually abandon this approach because they decide it is hard to reconcile with the nature of electronic communications and their interception. Citizenship shouldn’t base our understanding of surveillance and the right to privacy – geography is key Marko Milanovic (Lecturer, University of Nottingham School of Law; Visiting Professor, University of Michigan Law School, Fall 2013; Secretary-General, European Society of International Law) 2014 “Human Rights Treaties and Foreign Surveillance: Privacy in the Digital Age” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2418485 We can accordingly draw two basic lessons from the preceding discussion for the applicability of human rights treaties to foreign surveillance programs: First, the threshold question of whether individuals enjoy human rights generally, and the right to privacy specifically, vis-à-vis a particular state should in principle not depend on whether they have that state’s nationality. When it comes to the interpretation of the jurisdiction clauses in human rights treaties, to which I will come in a moment, an individual cannot be within the jurisdiction of a state party merely because he or she is a national of that state.59 In other words, if the UK at the same time intercepts the electronic communication of one UK national and one non-UK national living outside the UK, either both or neither have human rights vis-à-vis the UK. The citizen cannot be treated preferentially. Second, if human rights treaties do apply to a particular interception or some other surveillance activity, and the intercepting state draws distinctions on the basis of nationality (as many of them do), this potentially implicates not only the privacy guarantees in the treaties, but also those on equality and non-discrimination. A nationality-based distinction would be justified only if it pursues a legitimate aim (such as the protection of national security) and the measures taken serve that aim and are proportionate.60 If the rationale for protecting privacy interests is the value of the autonomy and independence of individuals, of enabling them to lead their lives without state intrusion, then distinctions based on nationality alone would seem hard to justify.61 This is particularly so because it simply cannot be reasonably argued that non-citizens are as a class inherently more dangerous to the security of a state than its own citizens or permanent residents (viz. the 7 July 2005 London tube terrorist bombings, conducted by UK nationals, the 5 November 2009 mass shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, by Nidal Hasan, a US national and then a major in the US Army, or the 15 April 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, perpetrated by the Tsarnaev brothers, one of whom was a US citizen and the other a US permanent resident).62 This is not to say, on the other hand, that no distinctions may be drawn at all on the basis of the location or type of surveillance or other individual characteristic of the target. But it would be difficult for the UK to justify, say, having one surveillance regime for its own citizens living in the UK, and another for foreign nationals who are also in the UK, or to treat citizens and non-citizens radically differently in an extraterritorial context.63 Thus, for instance, in the Belmarsh case the House of Lords struck down the UK government’s post 9/11 order derogating from Article 5 ECHR, which allowed for the preventive security detention of foreign nationals, on the grounds that distinguishing between nationals and foreigners in the counter-terrorism context was disproportionate, discriminatory and irrational.64 This was also the conclusion of a unanimous Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, despite the fact that it was prepared to pay the UK significant deference in determining whether an emergency threatening the life of the nation in the sense of Article 15 ECHR existed and what measures were appropriate to deal with that emergency: The Court, however, considers that the House of Lords was correct in holding that the impugned powers were not to be seen as immigration measures, where a distinction between nationals and non-nationals would be legitimate, but instead as concerned with national security. Part 4 of the 2001 Act was designed to avert a real and imminent threat of terrorist attack which, on the evidence, was posed by both nationals and non-nationals. The choice by the Government and Parliament of an immigration measure to address what was essentially a security issue had the result of failing adequately to address the problem, while imposing a disproportionate and discriminatory burden of indefinite detention on one group of suspected terrorists. As the House of Lords found, there was no significant difference in the potential adverse impact of detention without charge on a national or on a non-national who in practice could not leave the country because of fear of torture abroad. ... [T]he Court notes that the national courts, including SIAC, which saw both the open and the closed material, were not convinced that the threat from non-nationals was more serious than that from nationals. In conclusion, therefore, the Court, like the House of Lords, and contrary to the Government’s contention, finds that the derogating measures were disproportionate in that they discriminated unjustifiably between nationals and non- nationals.65 In sum, one cannot escape the conclusion that under the moral logic of human rights law citizens and non-citizens are equally deserving of protection for their rights generally, and privacy specifically. In the counterterrorism and surveillance context, non-citizens neither inherently pose a greater threat to a state’s security than its citizens, nor is their private information of inherently greater value or interest to the state.66 If citizenship is normatively irrelevant for the threshold question of whether a human rights treaty applies to a particular act of surveillance, and may be relevant only for the substantive merits question of whether the right to privacy or the prohibition of discrimination have been violated, then the truly critical question becomes the territorial scope of human rights treaties on the basis of the location of the individual and/or the interference with his rights, regardless of that person’s nationality. With this in mind, let us look at whether the text of ICCPR can allow for its extraterritorial application. Then make up some T is not a voter issue and you should be fine.
  8. Ive always ran Cap v Race, its a lazy answer but most judges will buy it. Here's a campfile I have from last years topic if you want an idea of how the argument works. Cap K vs Race Affs - Michigan7 2014.docx
  9. If you want an example of how the above DA would be run I would suggest looking at this forum. https://www.cross-x.com/topic/59922-court-justice-da/?hl=%2Bpolitics&do=findComment&comment=925624
  10. Basically it links by saying that surveillance exist outside the law, and the aff is a mechanism of the state of exception.
  11. Ive always found this file very interesting when considering if debate is Elitist. https://www.cross-x.com/files/file/10486-whiteprivilegemattheweffectk/
  12. https://www.cross-x.com/topic/59892-a-dictionary-of-the-history-of-our-authors/?hl=%2Bacubehas4sides&do=findComment&comment=925509 All of these except debateak (unless you plan on debating on this website)
  13. My strats always been: 1. Read the decision of Waldron v. United States as proof that tribes ultimately have the power to choose enrollment practices. 2. Read a few Indian constitutions and there classification of how to determine enrollment practices. 3. State that taking away Blood quantum would make it impossible to enforce their Constitution 4. Impact turn the entire case by claiming the the affs plan undermines Native rights/ability to govern based on their constitution. Pretty bad arguments, but they seem to work well. (although I haven't meet anyone running this that has actually done indepth research)
  14. You have to set it to forums, it defaults to pages for some reason (under "Search results" click on forums)
  15. eh empiric doesn't really make the argument flow you direction, i'm not saying that we should ONLY rely on practice or experience alone, in fact I believe it is very important to engage in philosophical debates. What i'm saying is a direct comment to those who relentlessly claim that limits to what kritiks are appropriate in a round somehow destroys the educational value of a debate. As if me studying the indepth arguments against TimeCube really contribute to my education. Yeah I know this is extremely objective. It honestly just my opinion. (also my ableism block file is probably my best file (i have a cussing problem) (also you suggest 2013 NDT finals and then suggest ableism k? plz. xD)
  • Create New...