Jump to content

AQuackDebater

Member Since 21 Nov 2016
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 03:42 PM
*****

#936862 Was The Rutgers Strategy Justified? (NDT Finals 2016-2017)

Posted by AQuackDebater on 28 March 2017 - 06:06 PM

I absolutely hate --HATE-- when outsiders like the author of that article pass such harsh judgment on the debate community. Like seriously, it bothers me immensely.

 

It's just so hard to see an activity that you love and that has been so formative in your life get shat on by someone who has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Especially since that's the mainstream opinion of policy debate and it's so hard to help outsiders see the value of what we do. 

I agree with Ben entirely on this point - if you haven't played the game, don't bitch about the rules. You just come off as whiny and nobody likes you.


  • 1


#936861 Was The Rutgers Strategy Justified? (NDT Finals 2016-2017)

Posted by AQuackDebater on 28 March 2017 - 06:05 PM

In all honesty I like what Rutgers did. I've been warming up to it more and more. As a debater with disability I can definitely say that this space is somewhat unaccessible for certain groups, although I'm fortunate in that I've had coaches and teammates who are immensely supportive, and I've been able to get past my own difficulties to become a passable debater.

 

I personally wouldn't have done what they did, I think that they kind of "ceded the political" if we think of the debate space itself as the political in this case, but I can see the reasoning behind what they did. Sometimes, when you're just fed up with the system, you just kinda have to say "fuck it" and quit trying to work with the system, start making the system have to work with you. I can get behind that. I'm not a person of color, so I'm not gonna pretend I understand the nuances of what they did and why, but I've grown up dirt-poor, and lived in poor, mostly minority neighborhoods for a lot of my life, so I can definitely at least attest to the fact that frustration is there and is very real, and I think what they did in the debate round is just a mirroring of that. Going to a poor school, it's hard as fuck to be a debater. I've worked under the table since I was 13 to help my mom pay bills, I barely have time to do debate at all. And when I see rich as fuck schools like Greenhill, Westwood, West Lake (no offense Vinay), it makes me mad because no matter how much work I do, no matter how much prep or practice I put in, I will never be able to make up for the fact that those schools just have access to more resources than I ever will, and I can never make up for that. So in a way a part of me does certainly feel "fuck debate dude it's inherently biased against people with arbitrary disadvantages like me." Obviously, being poor isn't the same as being black, and I don't pretend to be able to feel the same thing that Rutgers did, but I'll be damned if I can't respect and agree with it.


  • 1


#936855 Rutgers finals video taken down

Posted by AQuackDebater on 28 March 2017 - 05:57 PM

Yo I'm not gonna lie I laughed hard at "Keebler elf" that was funny as hell. Words do not describe the savagery.


  • 2


#936546 counterplan theory

Posted by AQuackDebater on 21 March 2017 - 04:35 PM

That's all pretty fair. To be clear, I don't actually think neg fiat is inherently abusive; it's just one of my pet arguments.

really Ben I'm shocked

astounded

betrayed

who'd've thought it

 

(I promise I'm getting back to our round asap)


  • 1


#936538 counterplan theory

Posted by AQuackDebater on 21 March 2017 - 02:03 PM

My answer to 'no neg fiat' is and always will be "We're not using fiat. We're presenting an opportunity cost to the Affirmative in the form of an alternative course of action and asking the judge to reject the Affirmative on the merit of that action."

Yeah, this is the same reason the perm isn't offense, it's always defense. Think of the CP as an opportunity-cost DA. The "link" is if we do the aff we miss out on the better option, which triggers the impact in the form of the net benefit. So a perm is just a way of "de-linking" the DA. That's also why you don't need to win mutual exclusivity to win the CP, just net benefit, because if you win no NB to the perm then it's kind of like a risk of link arg.


  • 1


#936514 How to win Framework debates vs Kritiks

Posted by AQuackDebater on 20 March 2017 - 06:47 PM

https://www.cross-x....m-or-something/ I posted a long ass explanation here that people seemed to like. Ten posts down


  • 1


#936445 how to impact turn K affs?

Posted by AQuackDebater on 19 March 2017 - 10:26 AM

Yeah that was in poor taste of me, I should have explained further, I was making a Bifo joke, he mentioned in a lecture once about how suicide is just an extreme form of escape from cognitive capitalism. Bifo impact turns everything.

 

I wasn't trying to trivialize the matter, I was really tired when I wrote that and didn't realize not everyone has read Bifo, that was my bad. Believe me, as the son of a psychiatrist and as someone who's nearly been institutionalized before, I know how serious the matter is. My apologies to anyone I offended, i meant no harm.

 

Delete your post. Saying stuff like this is extremely problematic. 

Also congrats on second at state Jonas!

 

 

edit - then again discourse doesn't solve so like this whole convo was pointless


  • 1


#936411 CEDA Streams

Posted by AQuackDebater on 18 March 2017 - 09:07 AM

1) way to assume my gender
2) fuck you, poo poo bitch

1) Sweet lemme get my 6-point language K turn

2) Quack quack kiddo I've been poppin caps in bitches like you since before you knew what poo-poo was I will literally end you


  • 2


#936380 how to impact turn K affs?

Posted by AQuackDebater on 17 March 2017 - 05:19 PM

someone ran a natives queerness mexicana crip kuare poesis antiblakness intersection aff

 

anyways, how do i best go about imact turning this POO POO- I like po poo

*deleted yee*


  • -2


#936378 Time Cube AFF

Posted by AQuackDebater on 17 March 2017 - 05:06 PM

lwGHFi8.png

 

I just talked to my boy Nietzsche, and I have some bad news for you my friend...

 

Fuck how do you do images


  • 1


#936369 Time Cube AFF

Posted by AQuackDebater on 17 March 2017 - 04:39 PM

Somebody once told me the world is gonna roll me
I ain't the sharpest tool in the shed

She was looking kind of dumb with her finger and her thumb
In the shape of an "L" on her forehead


[Pre-Chorus]
Well, the years start coming and they don't stop coming
Fed to the rules and I hit the ground running
Didn't make sense not to live for fun
Your brain gets smart but your head gets dumb

So much to do, so much to see
So what's wrong with taking the backstreets?

You'll never know if you don't go
You'll never shine if you don't glow

[Chorus]
Hey now you're an All Star get your game on, go play
Hey now you're a Rock Star get the show on, get paid
And all that glitters is gold
Only shooting stars break the mold

[Verse 2]
It's a cool place and they say it gets colder
You're bundled up now but wait 'til you get older

But the meteor men beg to differ
Judging by the hole in the satellite picture

The ice we skate is getting pretty thin
The water's getting warm so you might as well swim

My world's on fire, how about yours?
That's the way I like it and I'll never get bored


[Chorus]
Hey now you're an All Star get your game on, go play
Hey now you're a Rock Star get the show on, get paid
And all that glitters is gold

Only shooting stars break the mold

[Bridge]
(Go for the moon)
(Go for the moon)
(Go for the moon)
(Go for the moon)

[Chorus]
Hey now you're an All Star get your game on, go play
Hey now you're a Rock Star get the show on, get paid
And all that glitters is gold
Only shooting stars

[Verse 3]

Somebody once asked "Could I spare some change for gas?
I need to get myself away from this place"
I said "Yep, what a concept
I could use a little fuel myself
And we could all use a little change!"


[Pre-Chorus]
Well, the years start coming and they don't stop coming
Fed to the rules and I hit the ground running
Didn't make sense not to live for fun
Your brain gets smart but your head gets dumb
So much to do, so much to see
So what's wrong with taking the backstreets?
You'll never know if you don't go
You'll never shine if you don't glow

[Chorus]
Hey now you're an All Star get your game on, go play
Hey now you're a Rock Star get the show on, get paid
And all that glitters is gold
Only shooting stars break the mold
And all that glitters is gold
Only shooting stars break the mold

 

 

:Bow 

may or may not make this my signature


  • 3


#936279 China - NickDB8 [A] vs vmanAA738 [N]

Posted by AQuackDebater on 16 March 2017 - 05:47 PM

wtf is wrong with the strickland evidence

*chokes*

"space we need for survival"

 

Warrantz 2 gud get rekd kidz


  • 1


#936264 China - NickDB8 [A] vs vmanAA738 [N]

Posted by AQuackDebater on 16 March 2017 - 02:25 PM

So, I'm not gonna lie, I didn't know what that K was, nor did I have frontlines, or even a general A2 file, for it. Was the 2AC constructed in an okay-ish manner, given I didn't understand the K nor have answers to it?

You did alright, a lot better than I'd have done if I had no idea wtf I was dealing with. I feel like the strongest arg you made was the perm, even though it was generic as hell, I feel like CtP is always a very convincing arg, for perms as well as FW.

Just look into it. I went into what the K was (to my understanding) above. It's just a K of globalization, so to speak.


  • 1


#936252 China - NickDB8 [A] vs vmanAA738 [N]

Posted by AQuackDebater on 16 March 2017 - 10:43 AM

I vote aff. And it really only comes down to the wording of the counterinterp because the 2ar doesn't go for the conditional ethics stuff and since the 2nr only goes for the PIC, if i reject the argument then I'm rejecting the team as well. 

 

I think if you wanted to use the term "may" to indicate optionality, then the counter interp should have been "counterplans may be only textually competitive". Obviously I know what you meant in the 1nr but if i were to decide the round based on what i think you mean rather than what you actually say then that would be a level of intervention that would be absurdly unfair to the aff

 

I also have a relatively high threshold for the 2nr clarification stuff. You had the whole block to explain the c/i and i don't feel comfortable voting on a clarification that only came out the neg's final speech of the round. I think the aff is right that 1ar clarification on a T violation would be questionable at best and i would rather use the ballot to encourage early explanations on interpretations so that we can have a nuanced theory debate in the latter part of the round than to let the neg get away with clarifying an interp in the 2nr, and that plus any risk that i don't buy the analysis on the clarification is enough to make me vote aff.

 

i feel rotten deciding a round on this. And just for transparency sake, I only went back to read the PIC parts since that's what the round came down to, so i can't give you the obligatory "you were really winning on x" as consolation, but I'm sure you definitely were. Even still this was a really awesome debate; it was fun to judge and to think about. So thanks to both of you

I agree with everything Ben said, and I also vote aff. I really, really hate discourse PICs. I think they're shit and a waste of time and energy, and honestly detract from substance and real debate. That being said, I tried to be as objective as I could here, and really it came down to the theoretical stuff, mainly the Counterinterp. I agree with been on the whole may/must distinction, with that being said I do have a lower threshold for judge intervention when it comes to semantics, i.e: I'm not gonna vote on a plan flaw because the plan text is grammatically incorrect (provided that the plan text is still coherent). In the end, it more came down to the fact that coming out of the block you have so little offense on the theory shell, and then after the 2NR I'm just like holy shit dude. Ben covered all that for me, so I won't go into it here.

 

Also I personally think you could've won on the Liberalism K. I really like the K and feel like although the 2AC had a bit of offense, you could've dealt with it without too much effort and had you carried that into the 2NR instead of the PIC it could've been a win.

 

Nick, I like the 1AC, I really do. But you gotta get better inherency. Other than that, good job. Good aff. Work on it.

 

As for the off, you could've done waaaaay better on the K just because I feel like you either didnt get it or intentionally misframed it. It's a K of liberalism and global governance, think of it as an Alex Jones K if you will, "THE GLOBALISTS ARE GONNA GET US!" If you can just argue Liberalism good at this point you win. For this reason, I didn't really weigh your cap evidence too much, simply because I feel like it didn't really apply. The affirmative biopower arg is good, I like it. Keep that. The perm was a bit shaky, it could've worked but you need specific stuff about how combating liberalism from within the system is good.

 

Also don't read the damn Strickland evidence. Just please do not. Refrain dude.

 

On the PIC, I like the perm arg, I'm totally gonna steal that card. PICs Bad shell was good.

 

Not much to say on the T debate. Everyone has T - QPQ blocked. You're both fine.

 

Overall, the spots where I found your dealing with the off lacking were 1 - the K, and 2 - you could've done waaaaaay more analysis in the 1AR, you dig?

 

In the end, I vote aff just because I don't have enough neg offense in the 2NR and 2AR to do anything but that. Vinay, I almost felt like you were playing defense in the block which you should not be doing, you know? You gotta be a bit more aggressive.

 

Any questions from either of you feel free! Good round!

 

 

Edit - clarified a thing or two


  • 1


#936214 China Vdebate -- vmanAA738 [A] vs. TheSnowball [N]

Posted by AQuackDebater on 15 March 2017 - 05:34 PM

Judge. Paradigms on my profile. You do you.


  • 1