Hunter College Potischman Neg
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | 1 | All | All |
|
| ||
| All | 1 | All | All |
|
| ||
| Bronx | 2 | Ft Lauderdale JF | Neha Pai |
|
|
| |
| Bronx | Doubles | TJ Foley | Nathan Cha |
|
| ||
| Bronx RR | 1 | TJ Foley | Sigalow, Nebel |
|
| ||
| Bronx RR | 7 | Ari Azbel | Tripathy, McGinnis |
|
| ||
| Harvard | Triples | Evanston HS | Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu |
|
|
| |
| Harvard | Triples | Evanston HS | Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu |
|
|
| |
| Harvard | Triples | Evanston HS | Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu |
|
|
| |
| Harvard RR | 3 | Jack Wareham | Paloma OConnor, Joey Schnide |
|
| ||
| Harvard RR | 6 | Richard Cook | Daniel Lu, Paul Zhou |
|
| ||
| Harvard Round Robin | 1 | Ari Azbel | Maddy Stevens, Jen Melin |
|
| ||
| Lexington | 1 | Success Academy AA | Kathy Wang |
|
| ||
| Lexington | 4 | Harrison MZ | Wesley Hu |
|
| ||
| Lexington | 6 | Ari Azbel | Rahul Gosain |
|
| ||
| Lexington | Semis | Sekou Cisse | Paloma OConnor, Daniel Shatzkin, Sheryl Kaczmarek |
|
| ||
| Penn Round Robin | 4 | Walt Whitman XR | Pranav Reddy, Chetan Hertzig |
|
| ||
| TOC | 4 | Ishan Bhatt | Chris Castillo |
|
| ||
| TOC | 5 | Jong Hak Won | Rahul Gosain |
|
| ||
| Valley | 3 | Derek Zhang | Terrence Lonam |
|
| ||
| Valley | Quarters | Grant Brown | Salim Damerdji, Preetham Chippada, Jack Ave |
|
|
| |
| Valley RR | 1 | Pyda | Carlson, Casas |
|
| ||
| Yale | 6 | Matt Goffman | Bob Overing |
|
| ||
| Yale | 1 | Ridge VK | Pregasen |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Bronx | 2 | Opponent: Ft Lauderdale JF | Judge: Neha Pai Counterfactual aff about authorization of the Manhattan Project - went for T-present Manhattan Project CP in the 2nr |
| Harvard | Triples | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu Read against an aff about plants |
| Harvard | Triples | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu Read against an aff about plants |
| Harvard | Triples | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu Read against an aff about plants |
| Valley | Quarters | Opponent: Grant Brown | Judge: Salim Damerdji, Preetham Chippada, Jack Ave Grant read a science fiction aff |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0 - Theory InterpsTournament: All | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All A: debaters must disclose all broken positions (including ACs, NCs, DAs, CPs and Ks) on the NDCA LD 2016-2017 wiki under their own name, school, and correct side with cites, tags, the first three and the last three words of all cards read at least an hour before the round begins. A: If debaters read theory spikes in the AC, they must disclose them on the NDCA LD 2016-2017 wiki under their own name at least an hour before the round. To clarify, a theory spike is a theoretical argument in the aff that has an interpretation and standards, that could potentially be extended as an offensive voting issue in the 1ar depending on the negative strategy. A: If the affirmative debater believes that the negative debater failed to disclose a position on the NDCA wiki, then they must ask the affirmative debater before the round to put said position on the wiki, and only read theory if the affirmative debater refuses. A: Debaters may not read theory shells in which the violation is a screenshot of a chat with another debater. A: The affirmative debater must defend that either a single country bans the production of nuclear power, or defend the resolution as a general principle. A: If the negative debater has nothing disclosed on the negative wiki, then they may not claim that it is unfair for the affirmative debater to read 1ar theory. A: Debaters must specify an agent in the form of a text in the AC who takes the aff action. A: if the affirmative debater reads an a priori in the aff, they may not put it in a spike about moral uncertainty. Rather, they must put it in a separate section explicitly labeled – independent reasons to vote aff. A: The affirmative debater may not claim presumption, claim that neg theory must be weighed against side bias, and claim that aff theory outweighs neg theory A: The affirmative debater may not claim that aff abuse outweighs neg abuse, neg may only read turns to the aff if they read theory, and that aff gets RVIs on theory. A: If the affirmative debater claims that the negative debater must accept the aff choice of paradigm as contextualized in the ac, including the role of the ballot, then they must read a consequentialist standard. A: if the negative debater shows the affirmative their speech doc, and tells them the NC strategy, then the affirmative debater must tell the negative debater if there are interpretations they would like the negative to meet. A: The affirmative debater must defend that either a single country bans the production of nuclear power, or defend the resolution as a general principle. A: If the affirmative debater defends that only one country prohibits the production of nuclear power, then they may not read theoretical justifications for their standard. Rather, they must only read substantive framework justifications. A: The affirmative debater may not read a science fiction story and ban the production of nuclear power in the world of their story A: The affirmative debater may not include in their advocacy text that they affirm the resolution as an act against colonialism. To clarify, your advocacy can’t be: “Private colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech as an act against colonialism.” A: The affirmative debater may not read theoretical justifications for their standard and claim that theoretical justifications for standards come first A: If the affirmative debater claims that they get 1ar theory, then they may not claim that the neg must gain offense from at most one unconditional route to the ballot. | 2/20/17 |
0 - Theory InterpsTournament: All | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All A: debaters must disclose all broken positions (including ACs, NCs, DAs, CPs and Ks) on the NDCA LD 2016-2017 wiki under their own name, school, and correct side with cites, tags, the first three and the last three words of all cards read at least an hour before the round begins. A: If debaters read theory spikes in the AC, they must disclose them on the NDCA LD 2016-2017 wiki under their own name at least an hour before the round. To clarify, a theory spike is a theoretical argument in the aff that has an interpretation and standards, that could potentially be extended as an offensive voting issue in the 1ar depending on the negative strategy. A: If the affirmative debater believes that the negative debater failed to disclose a position on the NDCA wiki, then they must ask the affirmative debater before the round to put said position on the wiki, and only read theory if the affirmative debater refuses. A: Debaters may not read theory shells in which the violation is a screenshot of a chat with another debater. A: The affirmative debater must defend that either a single country bans the production of nuclear power, or defend the resolution as a general principle. A: If the negative debater has nothing disclosed on the negative wiki, then they may not claim that it is unfair for the affirmative debater to read 1ar theory. A: The affirmative debater must defend that either a single country bans the production of nuclear power, or defend the resolution as a general principle. A: If the affirmative debater defends that only one country prohibits the production of nuclear power, then they may not read theoretical justifications for their standard. Rather, they must only read substantive framework justifications. A: The affirmative debater may not read a science fiction story and ban the production of nuclear power in the world of their story A: If the affirmative debater defends that only one country prohibits the production of nuclear power, then they may not read theoretical justifications for their standard. Rather, they must only read substantive framework justifications. A: If the affirmative debater wants the negative debater to tell them previous 2nrs, then they must ask them before the round. A: The affirmative debater may not read a science fiction story and ban the production of nuclear power in the world of their story A: The affirmative debater must defend implementation of a policy in which colleges do not restrict constitutionally protected speech. A: All affirmative spikes must be grammatically coherent. A: The affirmative debater may not claim presumption ground, claim that you reject theory not weighed against side bias, and that aff gets rvis but neg does not get 2nr rvis A: The affirmative debater may not claim that neg may not place necessary but insufficient burdens on the aff, and that neg theory is a reason to drop the argument while aff theory is a reason to drop the debater A. Interpretation: the aff must defend the implementation of a policy on college campuses that removes restrictions on constitutionally protected speech A. The affirmative debater must only defend removing restrictions of constitutionally protected speech. | 4/29/17 |
JAN FEB CP Brand AmbassadorsTournament: Lexington | Round: Semis | Opponent: Sekou Cisse | Judge: Paloma OConnor, Daniel Shatzkin, Sheryl Kaczmarek Corporations commercialize everyday college life through brand ambassadors – turning students into walking advertisements that turn universities into marketplaces. Singer 11, Student brand ambassadors commodify identity and reduces agency into mass-mediated interests – destroys the critical education purpose of universities. Giroux 02, Commercial intrusion in high education destroys our ability to challenge corporate power. Giroux 2, The AC flatly ignores that white supremacy is not the product of the agency of the white proletarian, but a tool of capital to divide labor. | 1/16/17 |
JAN FEB CP TobaccoTournament: Penn Round Robin | Round: 4 | Opponent: Walt Whitman XR | Judge: Pranav Reddy, Chetan Hertzig It competes—advertisement of commercial products is protected by the constitution. Tobacco companies use social events at universities to promote smoking—causes more regular tobacco use. Empirics prove—college tobacco marketing increases the chance of tobacco use. Tobacco Advertising exploits LGBTQ youth. Kulke 15, The tobacco industry targets poor minority communities by coopting civil rights rhetoric. Tuckson 88, | 4/1/17 |
JAN FEB K InstrumentalizationTournament: Harvard | Round: Triples | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu | 2/20/17 |
JAN FEB NC AugustineTournament: Lexington | Round: 6 | Opponent: Ari Azbel | Judge: Rahul Gosain Only Augustine’s focus on the ordered and hierarchal will can possibly unify the concept of personal identity. Freedom requires a division between desire and values, and only the Platonic/Augustinian renders that division coherent. Thus, the standard is consistency with the Ordo Amoris, defined as correctly orienting our love and appreciation. Hate speech undermines self-respect – three warrants. Only self-love and self-respect can be a correct orientation towards the good | 1/15/17 |
JAN FEB NC Augustine PlantsTournament: Harvard | Round: Triples | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu Until we recognize the underived and primary authority of the good no explanation can proceed -- only the Good can explain why there is something rather than nothing. Your attempt to identify the motivation to be ethical ignores the fact that the ethical is authoritative whether you recognize it or not. The vegetative or plant based soul should not be the end of our activity, because it is the form of life furthest from the good. This is because the vegetative is at the lowest level of transcendence of mere matter, and thus furthest from occupying a position of universality and sharing in the good. Additionally, the vegetative soul is common to all animals and humans, and thus we fully pursue the good found in plants by focusing on humans, for all the good of the vegetative soul is equally found co-present in the rational soul. | 2/20/17 |
JAN FEB NC Augustine V2Tournament: Harvard Round Robin | Round: 1 | Opponent: Ari Azbel | Judge: Maddy Stevens, Jen Melin Thus, the standard is consistency with the Ordo Amoris, defined as correctly orienting our love and appreciation. Exposure to speech endorsing problematic concepts prevents the correct orientations towards the world – restricting speech is necessary to ensure agents’ wills aligns with their valuational system Language informs the concepts we use to frame the world – problematic language corrupts ability to perceive the good The appropriate response of a university to speech can not be to safeguard it unconditionally – it must be sacrificed to pursue the university’s appropriate objectives Open speech in spaces where young people are educated is antithetical to those purposes. Individuals are too easily influenced by prevailing opinion precluding its acquisition of virtue. Only by restricting the speech people are exposed to when learning allows virtues to be adequately instilled. | 2/22/17 |
JAN FEB NC Augustine V3Tournament: Harvard RR | Round: 6 | Opponent: Richard Cook | Judge: Daniel Lu, Paul Zhou Thus, the standard is consistency with the Ordo Amoris, defined as correctly orienting our love and appreciation. Mental contamination undermines these appropriate orientations – restricting speech is necessary to ensure agents’ wills aligns with their valuational system Language is particularly important to the way we perceive the world—problematic words corrupt our understanding of the good. | 2/17/17 |
JAN FEB NC KantTournament: Lexington | Round: 1 | Opponent: Success Academy AA | Judge: Kathy Wang The ability to lay claim to property rights necessitates the existence of a collective will that can have power over individuals Thus, the standard is consistency with the omnilateral will. Put away your generic Kant answers – the aff uses Kantian political philosophy, not moral philosophy. I contend that public entities have an obligation to restrict some constitutionally protected free speech. | 1/14/17 |
JAN FEB NC Kant V2Tournament: Lexington | Round: 4 | Opponent: Harrison MZ | Judge: Wesley Hu The ability to lay claim to property rights necessitates the existence of a collective will that can have power over individuals Thus, the standard is consistency with the omnilateral will. Put away your generic Kant answers – the aff uses Kantian political philosophy, not moral philosophy. I contend that public entities have an obligation to restrict some constitutionally protected free speech. Second, hate speech relies on historical oppression, which obligates the state to intervene. | 1/15/17 |
JAN FEB NC VirtueTournament: TOC | Round: 4 | Opponent: Ishan Bhatt | Judge: Chris Castillo The standard is consistency with virtuous decision making. The affirmative endorses one action for all public colleges and universities. This destroys space for experimentation and assumes we are epistemically situated to make a judgement about every school. Negating is thus a recognition of our own epistemic humility. Further, this links directly to the standard because acting in accordance with epistemic humility is a primary epistemic virtue. | 4/30/17 |
JAN FEB T ImplementationTournament: Harvard | Round: Triples | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Dani Reyes, Becca Traber, Wesley Hu Restrict means to confine within bounds. Constitutionally protected speech is a set of rights guaranteed by the 1st amendment. | 2/20/17 |
SEPT OCT CP ExperimentationTournament: Valley | Round: Quarters | Opponent: Grant Brown | Judge: Salim Damerdji, Preetham Chippada, Jack Ave All inquiry starts with a purpose - the ultimate end of thought is the production of belief and the satisfaction of doubt. Ethics is thus aimed at practical ends. All fields of knowledge, including moral knowledge, are still constrained by the general procedure of pragmatic inquiry. | 9/26/16 |
SEPT OCT CP Geological Waste RepositoriesTournament: Yale | Round: 1 | Opponent: Ridge VK | Judge: Pregasen Solves case – waste depositories minimize negative effects while giving communities a say. Geological depositories solve the aff. Solves case – tribes are demanding waste facilities not removal of waste altogether. | 9/18/16 |
SEPT OCT CP Hiroshima and NagasakiTournament: Bronx | Round: 2 | Opponent: Ft Lauderdale JF | Judge: Neha Pai | 10/15/16 |
SEPT OCT CP JaneTournament: Valley | Round: Quarters | Opponent: Grant Brown | Judge: Salim Damerdji, Preetham Chippada, Jack Ave | 9/26/16 |
SEPT OCT CP Manhattan ProjectTournament: Bronx | Round: 2 | Opponent: Ft Lauderdale JF | Judge: Neha Pai Countries require reliable energy to meet base-load capacity – a nuclear energy ban only leads to reliance on coal - other fuels aren’t viable The coal industry is built on racism | 10/15/16 |
SEPT OCT CP Mother NatureTournament: Valley | Round: Quarters | Opponent: Grant Brown | Judge: Salim Damerdji, Preetham Chippada, Jack Ave | 9/26/16 |
SEPT OCT CP NPTTournament: Yale | Round: 6 | Opponent: Matt Goffman | Judge: Bob Overing | 9/18/16 |
SEPT OCT Coal DA V3Tournament: Bronx RR | Round: 7 | Opponent: Ari Azbel | Judge: Tripathy, McGinnis | 10/15/16 |
SEPT OCT DA - SpaceTournament: Valley RR | Round: 1 | Opponent: Pyda | Judge: Carlson, Casas Key to mars exploration Preserving the ability to colonize space outweighs every other impact – 10^14 human lives are lost every second we delay. Extinction’s inevitable on earth – space col solves multiple existential threats. Extinction is inevitable on earth. Mars colonization is possible – the resources are there and the environment is suitable We can terraform Mars | 9/26/16 |
SEPT OCT DA CoalTournament: Yale | Round: 1 | Opponent: Ridge VK | Judge: Pregasen Coal destroys native environments, economies, livelihoods, and culture Environmental harm from coal outweighs – it’s as radioactive as pollution from nuclear facilities, but lasts much longer. | 9/18/16 |
SEPT OCT DA Coal V2Tournament: Valley | Round: 3 | Opponent: Derek Zhang | Judge: Terrence Lonam This outweighs on probability - shutting down nuclear power has led to spikes in use of fossil fuels – that’s more likely then reliance on renewables The coal industry is horribly exploitative and unsafe—it’s corrupt to lower prices to meet international energy markets. | 9/24/16 |
SEPT OCT DA South Korea WarmingTournament: Yale | Round: 6 | Opponent: Matt Goffman | Judge: Bob Overing Warming causes extinction and adaptation can’t solve | 9/18/16 |
SEPT OCT DA TaiwanTournament: Bronx | Round: Doubles | Opponent: TJ Foley | Judge: Nathan Cha Lack of domestic energy production in Taiwan is spurring an energy crisis that will damage the economy. Taiwan needs nuclear power- otherwise they won’t have any reliable sources of energy. Taiwan’s economy is key to innovative solutions to climate change. Warming is real, anthropogenic, and causes extinction. | 10/16/16 |
SEPT OCT NC PragmatismTournament: Yale | Round: 6 | Opponent: Matt Goffman | Judge: Bob Overing All fields of knowledge, including moral knowledge, are still constrained by the general procedure of pragmatic inquiry. Thus, the standard is consistency with the methodological constraints of social inquiry. Impact calculus: a. the standard is not util – it does not say that we only care about the consequences of a certain action, rather it’s a theory of how certain consequences relate to our notion of truth. The rules of scientific inquiry are a constraint on our pursuit of certain consequences, b. non-absolutism is key to finding truth – the pragmatic solution to a given problem varies based on situation. Understanding nuclear energy from the standpoint of social experimentation is inconsistent with the logic of a ‘ban.’ The very notion of banning the technology miss-frames the debate in a way incompatible with pragmatic social experimentation. And this experimental attitude is necessary to reconcile with the philosophical tradition of pragmatism. The changing landscape around energy renders absolutist solutions, such as a ban, this early in our technological understanding utterly misplaced as a form of social decision making methodology. | 9/18/16 |
SEPT OCT T Fuel CycleTournament: Valley RR | Round: 1 | Opponent: Pyda | Judge: Carlson, Casas | 9/26/16 |
SEPT OCT T ImplementationTournament: Bronx RR | Round: 1 | Opponent: TJ Foley | Judge: Sigalow, Nebel B: C: Merriam Webster defines “country” “Prohibit” means legal enforcement Nuclear power is a form of energy production regulated by governments through laws. | 10/13/16 |
SEPT OCT T SquoTournament: Bronx | Round: 2 | Opponent: Ft Lauderdale JF | Judge: Neha Pai | 10/15/16 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|