Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'pic'.
Found 6 results
-
As Neg, my partner and I tend to like our counterplans. They're homecut, (mostly my partner's work, I'll admit), and that makes them really hard to fight directly--there's no OpenEvidence direct answers to our cards. So, the Aff teams usually go for Perm: do both, and we make the argument that the Perm is a cop-out: instead of debating the merits of our Negative strategy, they ignore it and continue to do their own thing, even going as far as to insinuate that THEY presented it. It's credit-stealing laziness--Bad for education; prevents the merits of possibly better ideas from being discussed, and discourages the use of home-cut arguments. We usually win on this argument, but I'm worried about what will happen once we start facing better teams. How does it sound? How can I make this argument better? What can I expect against this argument against more competent debaters?
- 20 replies
-
- 10
-
-
-
- counterplans
- pic
- (and 3 more)
-
So this year doing Kansas state 4-speak, we were running Venezuelan oil on aff. Where I am from, there isn't a lot of exposure to kritiks and advanced theory. Still, my partner and I are fairly well versed in K and CP theory, but apparently not well enough. The neg team that we hit ran cap, which, even with minimal k experience, I understood fairly proficiently. The k was pretty simple. It had an alt of distributionism, but not any isolated text or anything. So out of absolutely nowhere, the 2NC is telling the judges to pull the trigger on the "floating pic." This never came up in the 1N. I didn't flow it - neither did my partner. We were super confused, and when we asked the 2N what his floating pic meant, the kid just looked at the two experienced judges, they both nodded, and since they knew what it was, he just went on ranting about something else without answering. We lost, picking up the lay judge and dropping the 2 experienced judges - they voted on the pic... What did we lose on???
-
Long story short, I am trying to construct a basic NGO pic for the LD resolution: countries ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power. I have most of it constructed, but I am struggling with the concrete argument of the competition: how is an NGO law/action SEPARATE from the country. Like, what I have in my head is that the NGO is the one actually prohibiting it, and the countries would just adhere/sign the treaty- and that the NGO is the one truly doing the action. Any thoughts?
-
Didn't see a post generated for my latest file. check it out and feel free to ask me any questions about it! http://www.cross-x.com/files/file/11157-victim-pik/
-
I'm new to policy, and I'm wondering what is functionally different between a plan-inclusive counterplan made in the 1NC and a perm do both to the CP made in the 2AC. For example, if the Aff plan is arguing for the plan to be enacted by the federal government and the CP is that it should be enacted by the private sector, then, if the Aff runs a perm do both in the 2AC, how would that be different from a PIC in the 1NC that says that both the private sector and federal government should enact it? I guess I'm asking what makes a PIC competitive.
-
How does one go about answering the States PIC (the advocacy against the state)? If you have a file I'm willing to trade, or just tips would be great as well. PM me!
