Summary

• Objects (0 modified, 0 added, 1 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[15]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[15]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,33 +1,0 @@
1		-**Interpretation: The aff may only garner offense from the hypothetical policy implementation of the resolution.**
2		-
3		-‘Resolved’ reflects policy passage before a legislative body.
4		-
5		-Parcher 01
6		-Jeff Parcher, Former Debate Coach at Georgetown University, NDT, CEDA, February 2001.
7		-(1) Pardon me if I turn to...
8		-AND
9		-...of course, are answers to a question.
10		-
11		-**Reasons to Prefer:**
12		-
13		-**First, engagement: There are infinitely many non-topical affs–a precise and predictable point of difference is key to effective decision-making.**
14		-
15		-Steinberg and Freeley 13
16		-David Steinberg, Lecturer in Communication Studies and Rhetoric, Advisor to Miami Urban Debate League, Director of Debate at U Miami, Former President of CEDA, and Austin Freeley, Criminal and Civil Rights Attorney JD, Suffolk University, "Argumentation and Debate Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making,” Wadsworth Cengage Learning, pp. 121-124, 2013.
17		-Debate is a means of settling differences...
18		-AND
19		-...will be outlined in the following discussion.
20		-
21		-**Second, policy education: State action is inevitable–deliberation on policymaking is the only way to create social change in debate.**
22		-
23		-Coverstone 05
24		-Alan Coverstone, Masters in Communication from Wake Forest, Longtime Debate Coach, Montgomery Bell Academy, “Acting on Activism: Realizing the Vision of Debate with Pro-social Impact,” National Communication Association Annual Conference, November 15, 2005. DY
25		-An important concern emerges when Mitchell describes...
26		-AND
27		-...voter and participatory abstention in America today.
28		-
29		-**Third, limits: Non-topical performances make the neg prep burden impossible—there are an infinite number of ways they can performatively address the topic—requiring them to defend topical action ensures a predictable lit base from which both debaters can effectively craft arguments—that’s key to clash and dialogue on every important issue—internal link turns their education and proves an independent fairness impact.**
30		-
31		-**Fourth, topical version of the aff is the resolutional policy justified by their performance. That solves 100 of their offense, and proves we can access all of their education through a narrow discussion of the topic–they can read the performance as a framework argument to justify a topical aff –there’s no reason voting off it is key.**
32		-
33		-**Vote neg—this debate is a comparison of methods—use your ballot to reject the 1AC and endorse the pedagogical value of topical debates about campus speech codes—the ballot is key to create better norms for debate because the 2NR is too late for me to generate offense to a topical affirmative.**

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-2017-02-16 03:59:57.0

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Evan ODonnell, Gabe Ren, Kevin Wei

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Stuyvesant KL

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-7

Round

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Semis

Team

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-duPont Manual Yi Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-1 - Framework

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-42nd University of Pennsylvania Tournament