Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[51]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[51]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[51]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-03 03:09:17.600
	1	+2017-02-03 03:09:17.0

Caselist.CitesClass[51]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,77 @@
	1	+===1nc – T "Any" ===
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+
	5	+====Interpretation: Any means every====
	6	+Definition of ANY. (2016). Merriam-**webster**.com. Retrieved 14 December 20**16**, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/any
	7	+b : every —used to indicate one selected without restriction any child would know that
	8	+
	9	+
	10	+
	11	+====In the context of free speech, Any refers to all legally—prefer our evidence====
	12	+**Danilina NO DATE** (S., staff writer for black’s law dictionary, "Is Flag Burning Illegal?" http://thelawdictionary.org/article/is-flag-burning-illegal///LADI)
	13	+Interesting that the burning of the flag has been against the law until 1969.
	14	+
	15	+AND
	16	+
	17	+decision to award the First Amendment protection to the burning of the flag.
	18	+
	19	+
	20	+
	21	+====Violation: their defend the protection of only some constitutionally protected free speech, not all of it ====
	22	+
	23	+
	24	+
	25	+====Standards:====
	26	+
	27	+
	28	+
	29	+====Aff skew – the interpretation incentivizes increasingly unpredictable and small affs the negative will always be behind in the affirmative’s interpretation – they will always be unable to prepare and research against the infinite number of affs that the affirmative can bring up ie. The affirmative could be protecting something like "Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict students’ right to write papers on Kant" or that "Colleges shouldn’t restrict students’ right to say racism bad" that kill discussion and make the debate impossible for the neg – destroys fairness ====
	30	+
	31	+
	32	+
	33	+====Research Burden – the negative will always be behind in the affirmative’s interpretation – they will always be unable to prepare and research against the infinite number of affs that the affirmative can bring up – destroys education because this leads to shallow debates with no valuable clash occurring and destroys fairness for the negative to be able to win1. Vote on fairness - the judge needs to enforce competitive equity to serve their role of evaluating the winner. ====
	34	+
	35	+
	36	+
	37	+====D. Voter====
	38	+
	39	+
	40	+
	41	+====1. Vote on fairness - the judge needs to enforce competitive equity to serve their role of evaluating the winner. ====
	42	+
	43	+
	44	+
	45	+====2. Education – the game itself is valuable since it teaches us about the topic and other portable skills that apply outside of debate, which should be preserved to make the game worth playing. ====
	46	+
	47	+
	48	+
	49	+====3. Drop the debater because it chills abusive practices====
	50	+
	51	+
	52	+
	53	+====4. Competing interps:====
	54	+
	55	+
	56	+
	57	+====It sets norms since we find the best practice for debate which checks more abusive practices in the future====
	58	+
	59	+
	60	+
	61	+====Reasonability leads to a race to the bottom since people will constantly toe the line and read increasingly abusive arguments====
	62	+
	63	+
	64	+
	65	+====Reasonability is arbitrary since we don’t know what is "reasonable," inviting judge intervention or random unjustified thresholds====
	66	+
	67	+
	68	+
	69	+====5. No RVIs====
	70	+
	71	+
	72	+
	73	+====Chills theory – fear of the loss discourages debaters from running theory to check abuse and encourages abuse. Good theory debaters will run abusive positions to bait theory and win the round. T is a stock issue, don’t reward them for meeting their burden====
	74	+
	75	+
	76	+
	77	+====Forces theory – RVI’s center the debate on t since substance has zero utility, so each speech has an incentive to go solely for t, which destroys substantive education.====

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-03 03:09:19.309

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Amestoy, Tan, Leigh

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Harvard Westlake AM

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+51

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Dougherty Valley Sayani Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+JanFeb~-~-1nc~-~-T~-~- Any

Tournament

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