Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[23]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[42]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[23]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-11-05 19:52:27.951
	1	+2016-11-05 19:52:27.0

Caselist.CitesClass[42]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,11 @@
	1	+A) Interp—both debaters must disclose at least the following from all AC’s and NC’s read at TOC bid distributing tournaments on the Nov/Dec 2016-2017 qualified immunity: first, complete tag lines to all cards; second, first 3 words and last 3 words of all cards; third, the standard used to delineate what counts as offense and not offense with the claims to the warrants for that standard and fourth, taglines to all evidence read. If they do not, they must minimally have a wiki page with contact information.
	2	+
	3	+B) Violation—I have a screenshot of the aff’s wiki page. They have not disclosed anything, let alone created a wiki page or provided contact info.
	4	+
	5	+C) Standards—
	6	+
	7	+1. Equal Playing Field- disclosure levels the playing field since everyone knows what everyone else is running. Saying this helps big schools is bullshit since they already know what you are running through scouting. Bietz 10
	8	+Bietz, Mike (Mike Bietz is a former President of the National Debate Coaches Association and is the current debate coach at Harvard-Westlake School in Los Angeles.) “The Case for Public Case Disclosure.” May 2010.
	9	+As I outlined above, big teams already get many, many more flows than the smaller teams just because they have more debaters, more judges and more coaches. Open disclosure gives everyone access to the same information. Additionally, it helps the “little guy” even more because for many of these debaters, the option of going to a lot of tournaments isn’t available. Open case disclosure gives them the ability to see what other teams are running prior to showing up to the tournament. Thus, there is an added benefit of equalizing not only information at a tournament, but also equalizing (to some degree) the playing-field for people who do not have the resources to travel as much.
	10	+2. Clash
	11	+3. Academic Integrity

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-11-05 19:52:29.502

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Abbey Chapman

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Byram Hills RP

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+23

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+5

Team

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

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1 - Disclosure Theory

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Apple Valley