Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[35]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[36]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[35]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-10-30 02:29:38.93
	1	+2016-10-30 02:29:38.0

Caselist.CitesClass[36]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,53 @@
	1	+Interpretation: The negative must read all topicality and theory interpretations indicting the affirmative advocacy in cross examination, giving the aff an opportunity to concede the interp.
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+
	5	+Interpretation: negative advocacies must be unconditional unless permed.
	6	+
	7	+
	8	+
	9	+Interpretation: The neg must only defend the converse of the plan, Taiwan ought not prohibit the production of nuclear power.
	10	+
	11	+
	12	+
	13	+Interpretation: Debaters may not read broken, carded positions that are not disclosed on the NDCA wiki if they do not provide contact information or some means of contacting them.
	14	+
	15	+
	16	+
	17	+Interpretation: the negative may not claim util triggers permissibility, claim permissibility negates, and critique the aff.
	18	+
	19	+
	20	+
	21	+Interpretation: Kritik alternatives must only be specific, solvent policy actions implemented by a single actor. The alt must have a solvency advocate that explains the implementation of the policy, and cannot be a rejection or mindset shift.
	22	+
	23	+
	24	+
	25	+Interpretation: If the negative advances multiple prefiat voting issues, such as reading theory and a prefiat criticism with a distinct role of the ballot, then the negative must weigh between them in the 1NC or explicitly delineate which prefiat impact comes first if asked in CX.
	26	+
	27	+
	28	+
	29	+Interpretation: the negative may only read paradigm issues on theory in the NC, and may not read any new paradigm issue arguments in the NR. To clarify, reading new arguments against the RVI in the NR is illegitimate.
	30	+
	31	+
	32	+
	33	+Interpretation: Pics must have a solvency advocate, defined as an author that advocates for the exact text of the implementation of the cp in the card read during the round.
	34	+
	35	+
	36	+
	37	+Interpretation: The negative must not read a pic against whole res affs – neg advocacies cannot include any component of the aff plan.
	38	+
	39	+
	40	+
	41	+Interpretation: Kritiks must be entirely exclusive of the aff, textually and functionally.
	42	+
	43	+
	44	+
	45	+Interpretation: if the negative introduces a role of the ballot of (x), they must specify and define what it means to (be the/do the/criticize) with minimally a sentence in their role of the ballot.
	46	+
	47	+
	48	+
	49	+Interpretation: the neg must read an nc or alternative moral framework.
	50	+
	51	+
	52	+
	53	+Interpretation: The neg may read at most 3 voters on theory shells without weighing between them in the text of the NC by explicitly prioritizing one.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-10-30 02:29:38.633

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+any

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+any

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+19

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Brentwood Younger Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1 - Interps

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+any