Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


LeKritiker last won the day on August 6 2017

LeKritiker had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

61 Excellent

About LeKritiker

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Name
    Dain Ross
  • School
    Caddo Magnet High School
  • Biography
    A rising debater seeking the success of the former team Caddo Magnet CM.
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

4058 profile views
  1. Well it has been forever since I've been on Cross-X. I don't usually like referring to past/ ancient topics that are probably archived somewhere, but when it comes to the gooiest of k's, these forums are often useful. Does anyone have any OOO files specifically for running on the Affirmative? I know some people messed around with the subject on the oceans topic, but the docs from that round have long since disappeared. Will trade very high
  2. I debated an interesting round against one of Greenhill's teams at their tournament where the 2N went for two counterplans in the 2NR, a PIC out of funding and a States CP, justifying under a spread-through theory block that the judge could kick the States CP if they "weren't winning on it." For some reason, this has become a strategy in college that has apparently had some success and I'm wondering how much influence it will have (has had) on high school debates. What's weird about this argument is that it's probably super abusive, but how do you respond to it? 2AR theory is often about judge kick incentivizing judge intervention, but in order for the judge to really evaluate the theory debate, there has to be some level of work done by the judge because the Negative never got to respond to it. The other option is to evaluate the theory debate as a draw (unless conditionality was extended, then it's a no-brainer), but another question arises: Do you hold them to the world of the first counterplan or the second (because I'm assuming the SQUO is an option)? I'm probably (definitely) not completely understanding this argument, or its functionality/ why it's strategic, so if anyone had anything to add, that'd be cool (unlike most other stuff, there's actually not much on CX.com about this issue, so I thought it'd be interesting to have a discussion #usethesearchbarbeforecreatinganewtopic). Basic 2AR block we wrote that round, kind of jokingly: Judge kick and going for 2 conditional advocacies in the 2NR is terrible for debate: 1) Late-breaking debates skew 2AR strategy and forcing analysis of argument interaction to be done after the debate by the judge, incentivizing intervention and blippy 2NR’s – Also makes the tournament run late which hurts everyone 2) (If condo was in the 1AR) it supercharges all of our offense on the condo debate and most of their defense no longer applies because they are no longer trying to find the best policy option by the end of the debate Means you should either: A- Kick the counterplan anyway and evaluate their other offense separately or B- Evaluate the permutation as a 100% viable world for the 2AR Edit: So apparently this is usually done by going for turns/ a disad via the SQUO, but that really doesn't make sense, because either A) Turns also apply to the counterplan and you run the risk of them claiming they link to the CP more than the Plan or B- the disad is a net benefit to the CP, so why wouldn't you just go all in the CP?
  3. *name is BifoBabe* He also wrote a new book so
  4. Its definitely not in the context of policy debate and that's why you won't see it in most high level rounds. Apparently the person who cut the card in the first place (forget who) decided it was an awful card and regretted cutting it. There's a giant block somewhere that gives a few more reasons that its wrong, idk where though. -> (see above comment)
  5. Hahaha, wait was this at nats? I'd really like to hear to whole story lol Edit: I keep picturing Issac with a lighter...
  6. *AHEM*falsifyingevidence*AHEM* Anyone notice that there are several banned users on this thread (or at least -1,000,000 rep., probably due to mods)? Thought that was interesting.
  7. Hats off to McDonough for a great year, and I'm glad there got to be a Final round between two of the superpowers (granted New Trier, Baltimore, Lhasa, and Montgomery Bell all have outstanding teams that equally deserved a spot). I've had the pleasure of debating Jerry and Raam and they very much stand up to their NDCA position as Number 1 team, though I was rooting for McDonough. If anyone has a recording of the Finals round or any Semis/ Quarters rounds or knows someone who does, it would be awesome if you could hit me/ the rest of Cross-X up with a link or copy if possible.
  8. Advantage 1 is inherency: Repeal the executive order. Advantage 2 is the Aff
  9. LeKritiker


    Whaaaaat, nooooo I'm definitely (1000000000% biased) not biased at all. Whaaaaat.
  10. LeKritiker


    UTNIF. No explanation necessary.
  11. Now where have I seen this author..... oh yeah, Lhasa.
  12. Super common phrase I've heard is "Omition = Admission" and it's pretty true, but I love seeing novice teams mention it every single speech as though it isn't already implied. Novices man, it's even better when the speaker goes through the entire list and says, "Okay, 3... 2... 1... START," and then proceeds to stutter while trying to read cards/ blocks as fast as possible before they get back into a pattern.
  13. Baudrillard Aff's, and by that I mean the same terrible expo Aff that everyone read, were awful. However Nordin was some of the best evidence on the entire topic, it made the neoliberalism kritik so much fun, and it's really good evidence. China/ war on terror is pretty interesting. Also, shoutout to Sam for the rivercrab Aff, you have solved your advocacy and now you have become a meme. Congrats. Also, I much preferred Chinese Exclusion to the Spectrality/ hauntology Affs because it was honestly one of the truest Affs this year. Trump immigration policy happened a little late though :c
  14. Best topic in my opinion. I miss the days of OTEC, Natural Gas, and Baudrillard Aff's that aren't all the same. I'm down to judge.
  • Create New...