Tournament:  | Round: Finals | Opponent:  | Judge:
Not sure how much I am going to be disclosing this year, but if we are hitting and you really want some disclosure message me on Facebook (and if we aren't Facebook friends feel free to add me because I am lonely and always seeking company). If you aren't on Facebook email me at JordanFarenhem@gmail.com . I'll try my best to meet your interp.

Tournament: Bronx | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge:
A-Interpretation: If either debater proposes an explicit role of the ballot that differs from the conventional truth testing model, he or she must specify how the round ought to play out under that role of the ballot in the AC/NC. To clarify, the role of the ballot must specify:

1. How we determine what a legitimate advocacy is under their role of the ballot, i.e. whether topicality constrains each debater’s advocacy.
   2. What area of the debate must be warranted, i.e. whether a normative framework needs to determine what counts as oppression
   3. What advocacies are acceptable under the role of the ballot.
   4. If the debate be driven solely by the flow. For example, a cap K role of the ballot must speak to whether I win if I prove voting for me has out of round benefits to cap whereas my opponent proves the resolution is capitalist. Pre and post fiat impacts must be distinguished. 

A. The aff must defend more than one country prohibits the production of nuclear power