| ... |
... |
@@ -1,27
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-A. Debaters may not contest an assumption in the resolution. |
| 2 |
|
- |
| 3 |
|
-A. Debaters may not contest multiple assumptions in the resolution. |
| 4 |
|
- |
| 5 |
|
-A. All offense proving the resolution true or false must impact to a single standard that is necessary and sufficient for both debaters. |
| 6 |
|
- |
| 7 |
|
-A. If the neg reads a necessary but insufficient burden, then they must concede the AC contention. |
| 8 |
|
- |
| 9 |
|
-A. The aff must explicitly specify a comprehensive role of the ballot and clarify how the round will play out under that role of the ballot in the form of a delineated text in the 1AC. To clarify, the aff must: |
| 10 |
|
- |
| 11 |
|
-1/ Clarify how offense links back to the role of the ballot, such as whether post-fiat offense or pre-fiat offense matters and which comes first. |
| 12 |
|
- |
| 13 |
|
-2/ Clarify what theoretical objections do and do not link to the aff, such as whether or not the aff comes before theory. |
| 14 |
|
- |
| 15 |
|
-3/ Clarify how to weigh and compare between competing advocacies i.e. whether the role of the ballot is solely determined by the flow or another method of engagement. |
| 16 |
|
- |
| 17 |
|
-A. Must disclose text of PICs 30 min prior to the round if the aff is disclosed. |
| 18 |
|
- |
| 19 |
|
-A. The negative must fiat the same actor as the affirmative. |
| 20 |
|
- |
| 21 |
|
-A. If the negative reads an alternative or counterplan, they must have a carded solvency advocate that says why colleges and universities should defend the CP. |
| 22 |
|
- |
| 23 |
|
-A. Debaters may not read a K alt that fiats a mindset shift |
| 24 |
|
- |
| 25 |
|
-A. The negative must specify what forms of speech they restrict |
| 26 |
|
- |
| 27 |
|
-A. The negative must defend a unique ethical framework from the aff. To clarify you cannot straight ref. |