Jump to content

AndrewmeisterB

Member
  • Content Count

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Okay

About AndrewmeisterB

  • Rank
    Novice

Profile Information

  • Name
    Andrew Bellah
  • School
    McKinney High School
  1. I'm relatively new to Policy Debate, and at a tournament last weekend there was this person who went Maverick and ran a thing called "whiteout" or an extinction impact turn. Their AC was a plan that baited the Negative to run a disad with an extinction impact, but then instead of refuting the disad they'd impact turn it, claiming that "extinction was good because life is suffering." Also, their NC was composed of a japan disad of the affirmative plan that yielded an extinction impact 100 or so years in the future, followed by a counterplan that would cause extinction "almost immediately." They then ran the same "extinction good because life is suffering" evidence and claimed that they outweighed on timeframe. Although this sounds odd, both the AC tactic of turning extinction and the extinction timeframe argument did well in several rounds and left my partner and I very confused. Does anybody have cards or evidence they could share regarding "extinction good" or an extinction impact turn? I also heard there's some specific philosopher associated with this idea. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...