| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,11 @@ |
|
1 |
+All reps arguments must be unconditional |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+The neg may not read an advocacy that defends banning nuclear power in all countries but one. To clarify, they can read PICs, but not this specific one. |
|
4 |
+ |
|
5 |
+The neg may not theoretically justify util, say extinction precludes under all theories, and justify epistemic modesty. |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+All advocacies must be unconditional |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+The negative may not read an advocacy of consulting indigenous people if its conditional, and they fiat that states don't intervene in consultation. |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+The negative may not read a burden that they concede is not sufficient, and also read theory that denies the Aff the RVI |