| ... |
... |
@@ -1,18
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-1. RVIs must be bidrectional |
| 2 |
|
-2. Normative ethic required |
| 3 |
|
-3. If they claim RVIs in the 1ac, must spec conditions of RVI |
| 4 |
|
-4. 1AC Spikes need to be fully fleshed out (voter, violations, paradigm issues) |
| 5 |
|
-5. Not reading stupid spikes like neg may only have one unconditional route to the ballot |
| 6 |
|
-6. Skep triggers bad |
| 7 |
|
-7. NIBs bad/A prioris Bad |
| 8 |
|
-8. Descriptive frameworks (like polls) bad |
| 9 |
|
-9. Flash, email chain, print, or lose |
| 10 |
|
-10. Disclose at least first 3 last 3, tags, and advocacy text(s) in a clear and easy to follow manner within 1 hour post debate |
| 11 |
|
-Must disclose aff 30 mins before round (if broken) |
| 12 |
|
-12. The affirmative must specify what constitutionally protected speech they defend in an explicit advocacy text in 1AC. |
| 13 |
|
-13. Hidden A prioris bad |
| 14 |
|
-14. Must know methodologies of studies (sample size, scope, etc) |
| 15 |
|
-15. Miscutting Ev Bad |
| 16 |
|
-16. O- Spec Bad |
| 17 |
|
-17. Intrinsic Perms Bad |
| 18 |
|
-18. If you read presumption in the aff, must spec conditions it is relevant. |