Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[20]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[33]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[20]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-11-14 19:45:41.337
	1	+2016-11-14 19:45:41.0

Caselist.CitesClass[33]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,33 @@
	1	+====Interpretation: On the November December 2016 NSDA LD topic, the affirmative must defend the implementation of a United States government policy that defends limiting qualified immunity for police officers. The Lectic Law Library clarifies what qualified immunity is.====
	2	+The Lectic Law Library. "Qualified Immunity." No date. http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/q063.htm
	3	+The defense of qualified immunity protects "government officials
	4	+AND
	5	+constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."
	6	+
	7	+
	8	+====And, "resolved" before a colon reflects a legislative forum.====
	9	+**AOS 4** (5-12, "~~# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon", http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
	10	+The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "
	11	+AND
	12	+Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.
	13	+
	14	+Violation
	15	+Standards
	16	+1. Ground.
	17	+2. Limits.
	18	+**Harris 10**
	19	+Harris, Scott ~~Debate coach for over 25 years, coaches University of Kansas Policy Debate Team~~, " This ballot," Published on CEDADebate.org Forums. 5/5/13. http://www.cedadebate.org/forum/index.php?topic=4762.msg10246.
	20	+Debates about what kinds of arguments we should or should not be making in debates are not insignificant either. The limits debate is an argument that has real pragmatic consequences. I found myself earlier this year judging Harvard's eco-pedagogy aff and thought to myself—I could stay up tonight
	21	+AND
	22	+will have little to no effect on the teams that refuse to debate the topic.
	23	+
	24	+3. Topic education.
	25	+4. Deliberation skills.
	26	+
	27	+Voters.
	28	+
	29	+====Fairness is a prerequisite to any form of discussion – turns all your K impacts. ====
	30	+Galloway 7
	31	+Debate as a dialogue sets an argumentative table, where ~~allows~~ all parties
	32	+AND
	33	+substitutes for topical action do not accrue the dialogical benefits of topical advocacy.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-11-14 19:45:43.150

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Ivens-Duran, Miyamoto, Scoggin

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+North Hollywood JS

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+20

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+San Marino Wu Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2 - Topicality

Tournament

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