Summary

• Objects (0 modified, 0 added, 1 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[50]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[50]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,11 +1,0 @@
1		-Interps Greenhill Doubles:
2		-Interpretation: Debaters can only advocate for drop the argument on fairness and education voters.
3		-Interpretation: Debaters cannot read interps with abuse linking to a lack of specification without checking in CX.
4		-Interp UT R4
5		-Interpretation: The negative cannot read a counter-plan that defends abolishing qualified immunity.
6		-Interp Strake RR R4-
7		-Interpretation: If the negative reads a conditional kritik alternative, they must clarify in a delineated text in the 1N what the other possible world they defend is.
8		-Interp UH R5
9		-Interpretation – If the aff clarifies this advocacy in the form of a text in the 1AC then the negative must have an explicit text in the 1NC clarifying their advocacy.
10		-Interp HW Octas
11		-Interpretation: If the negative reads a counterplan that fiats the supreme court doing the aff, they must provide a test case.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-2017-02-03 17:28:02.0

Judge

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

Opponent

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

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-45

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Strake Jesuit Chen Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-1 - Broken Interps List

Tournament

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