Changes for page San Marino Deng Neg
Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:40
Summary
-
Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Caselist.RoundClass[12]
-
- EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -2016-10-11 21:25:45. 3131 +2016-10-11 21:25:45.0
- Caselist.CitesClass[12]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,7 @@ 1 +If the aff reads a ROB, then it must be comprehensive and have specs of how the round should be evaluated under it in the AC. To clarify, the ROB must spec how we determine what a legit advocacy is, what area of the debate has to be warranted, if the debate is all flow or has pre-fiat implications, what theoretical objections can be made, and how competing advocacies are weighed under the ROB. 2 + 3 +The affirmative cannot read arguments in the AC that a) indict negative practices and have implications back to fairness and education, b) function as theoretical paradigmatic issues that would indict the negative practice of reading theory, c) advance theoretical weighing claims or d) advance potential theoretical voting issues in the AC. To clarify, the aff can make arguments that create topical burdens and ones that exist solely for clarification but may not read insert spikes here 4 + 5 +The affirmative must defend nuclear power in terms of both energy and weapons. 6 + 7 +The neg must accept the aff choice of role of the ballot. - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2016-10-11 21:25:47.92 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +12 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Triples - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +San Marino Deng Neg - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Broken Interps - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x