Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[12]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[21]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[12]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-10-10 00:48:07.259
	1	+2016-10-10 00:48:07.0

Caselist.CitesClass[21]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,13 @@
	1	+-If the affirmative parametricizes the resolution and does not defend generic links to the whole resolution, then they must disclose the plan text of the aff they are reading on the NDCA case wiki at least half an hour before the round or when pairings come out.
	2	+-Debaters who claim the negative must defend the “converse” of the resolution must clarify, in the form of a text in the AC, a list of possible violations of the interp.
	3	+-the Affirmative must only include paradigmatic theory spikes in the AC, meaning reasons why theory is drop the arg/debater, competing interps/reasonability, and RVI’s, or meta theory arguments pertaining to the theory debate, not substance.
	4	+-All debate positions must only contain secular arguments, or arguments that are not warranted by religious beliefs, UNLESS the debater presenting the position receives consent from the audience, judge(s), and opponent before the round.
	5	+-aff should disclose bidirectional 1ar theory interps that they want the negative to meet
	6	+-rob's must have an explicit weighing text and must be disclosed at least 15 min before the round1. Clarify how we determine what a legitimate advocacy is and how offense links back to the role of the ballot, such as whether topicality constrains the aff advocacy or not.
	7	+2. Every plank of the ROB must be warranted, just like the standard text for a normative ethical theory, and what area of debate must be warranted i.e. which assumptions we should accept and which we shouldn’t.
	8	+3. Clarify what theoretical objections do and do not link to the aff, and whether or not the aff comes before theory.
	9	+4. Describe how to weigh and compare between competing advocacies i.e. whether the role of the ballot is solely determined by the flow or another method of engagement.
	10	+-the affirmative must defend the specific implementation of a policy
	11	+-all 1AR interps that pertain to some action that must be taken by the negative in or out of round must be disclosed on the opponents wiki at least 15 min prior to the round.
	12	+-the affirmative must must disclose burden structure
	13	+-debaters may not read descriptive standards

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-10-10 00:48:09.311

Judge

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

Opponent

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

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+12

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lynbrook Venkatesh Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+0-Read Me

Tournament

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