ICoastalKingdom

You should have a TVA (Topical Version of the Aff) and a caselist in a good 2nr. TVA shows there's no offense on the standards debate because the aff could have been ran in another way while still addressing the same core case. An example would be if the aff was "reduce caps for Ugandan refugees", the 2NR might say "That's not T - Substantial, a topical version of the plan text would be to reduce caps for ALL refugees, and the aff can focus on Ugandan ones specifically if it wants". A caselist is just a list of the affs that could be run through your interp. It shows that you don't overlimit or kill core aff ground.

If you're running a K aff you're likely going to go up against a neg running framework that says you're destroying the competitive/game qualities of debate by not using a plan text... if the "debate = game" interp works for your aff, go ahead, but usually you see it ran the other way

David why u active once everyone threatens to sue 🤔

hi lord david

we have E V O L V E D

How far do u consider the surrounding area?

Why would West Point and the Navy not be able to debate the topic?

Bump for cross-x

In my shell I have cards that say: Democrats want education, Democrats are voting in huge amounts because they are so anti-Trump anti-GOP right now, but giving the Dems what they want makes em chill and not care as much to vote... means the Republicans win

PTX is pretty generic usually... Midterms is the best thing prolly right now

Ay u got those speech docs?

Undercommons / University K?

ok just cuz A2 Topical Version of the Affs: 1. Your examples don't even fit ur own interp 2. The example u gave isn't truly our aff, running our aff the way we intend is impossible with ur framework 3. lmao fuk T/FW

On that note: anyone got any DAs that aren't crap? Thanks in advance

Couldn't accelerationism be a turn to the cap k?