Changes for page Westwood Mandavilli Neg
Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:41
Change comment:
There is no comment for this version
Summary
-
Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Caselist.CitesClass[47]
-
- EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -2016-12-16 22:43:21. 8641 +2016-12-16 22:43:21.0
- Caselist.CitesClass[48]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,12 @@ 1 +A is the Interpretation: The affirmative can only garner offense by defending the hypothetical implementation of a government policy option. To clarify, they may not win by defending the truth value off the resolution. 2 + 3 +B is the Violation: The affirmative debater doesn’t defend the hypothetical implementation of the plan, they assume it will happen. They conceded in cx that they don’t defend the implementation of the plan. 4 + 5 +C is the Standards: 6 +1. Textuality 7 +Textuality is a prima facie voter for the neg. It doesn’t matter how fair the aff is; if the case doesn’t affirm the topic, then they haven’t met the aff burden. Also, textuality link turns other theory standards because it is the basis for claims to predictability and ground. Aff isn’t textual 8 +Resolved means a policy. 9 +Words and Phrases ‘64 Permanent Edition. “Resolved”. 1964. 10 +Definition of the word “resolve,” given by Webster is “to express an opinion or determination by resolution or vote; as ‘it was resolved by the legislature;” It is of similar force to the word “enact,” which is defined by Bouvier as meaning “to establish by law”. 11 + 12 +advocacy skills - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2016-12-16 22:43:22.546 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Aimun Khan - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Lake Highland Muhammed Khattak - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +29 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Westwood Mandavilli Neg - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +0 - T - Implementation - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Strake Jesuit