Lexington Bai Neg
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grapevine Classic | 2 | Southlake Carroll AS | Salazar, Davd |
|
|
| |
| Grapevine Classic | 3 | Elkins RS | Sun, Favian |
|
|
| |
| Grapevine Classic | Triples | Southlake Carroll SD | Stuckert, James |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 2 | Sharon RG | Jasani, Aryan |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 4 | American Heritage Broward MA | Robinson, Tajaih |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 5 | Strake Jesuit MS | Quisenberry, Jack |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | Doubles | Harrison AA | Krause, Lukas - Quisenberry, Jack - tanguturi, nikita |
|
|
| |
| Yale University Invitational 2021 | 1 | Oak Grove AA | Lee, Andrew |
|
|
| |
| Yale University Invitational 2021 | 4 | Park City NL | Rao, Anand |
|
|
| |
| Yale University Invitational 2021 | 5 | Memorial DX | Herrera, David |
|
|
| |
| baby | Finals | the oppositions | ysn flo |
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Grapevine Classic | 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll AS | Judge: Salazar, Davd 1ac - weed |
| Grapevine Classic | 3 | Opponent: Elkins RS | Judge: Sun, Favian 1ac - biopiracy medical access |
| Grapevine Classic | Triples | Opponent: Southlake Carroll SD | Judge: Stuckert, James 1ac - weed |
| Mid America Cup | 2 | Opponent: Sharon RG | Judge: Jasani, Aryan 1ac - access contraceptives |
| Mid America Cup | 4 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward MA | Judge: Robinson, Tajaih 1ac - indnigenous |
| Mid America Cup | 5 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit MS | Judge: Quisenberry, Jack 1ac - vaccine diplomacy covid access |
| Mid America Cup | Doubles | Opponent: Harrison AA | Judge: Krause, Lukas - Quisenberry, Jack - tanguturi, nikita 1ac - insulin |
| Yale University Invitational 2021 | 1 | Opponent: Oak Grove AA | Judge: Lee, Andrew 1ac - medicine access |
| Yale University Invitational 2021 | 4 | Opponent: Park City NL | Judge: Rao, Anand 1ac - virtue theory must check interps in cx |
| Yale University Invitational 2021 | 5 | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: Herrera, David 1ac - prag evergreening |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0 - Contact InfoTournament: baby | Round: Finals | Opponent: the oppositions | Judge: ysn flo | 7/7/21 |
0 - NavigationTournament: baby | Round: Finals | Opponent: the oppositions | Judge: ysn flo | 9/26/21 |
1 - Counter Solvency AdvocateTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 2 | Opponent: Sharon RG | Judge: Jasani, Aryan A. Interpretation: If the affirmative defends anything other than "The member nations of the world trade organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines," then they must provide a counter-solvency advocate for their specific advocacy in the 1AC. (To clarify, you must have an author that states we should not do your aff, insofar as the aff is not a whole res phil aff)B. Violation: they don't – they say united states and other countries shouldn't do the planC. Standards:1. Fairness – This is a litmus test to determining whether your aff is fair –a) Ground – there are infinite things you could defend outside the exact text of the resolution which pushes you to the limits of contestable arguments, even if your interp of the topic is better, the only way to verify if it's substantively fair is proof of counter-arguments. Nobody knows your aff better than you, so if you can't find an answer I can't be expected tob) Limits – Operating outside the bounds of the general maxim places an infinite research burden explodes neg prep2. Research – Forces the aff to go to the other side of the library and contest their own view points, as well as encouraging in depth-research about their own position. Having one also encourages more in-depth answers since I can find responses. Key to education since we definitionally learn more about positions when we contest our own. | 9/25/21 |
1 - Disclose In Cite BoxTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 2 | Opponent: Sharon RG | Judge: Jasani, Aryan A. Interpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions in cite boxes on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki. To clarify, they can't say check open source, and if cites don't work, they should have a note saying so.Debatecoaches no date https://hsld.debatecoaches.org/Main/ Violation: see the screenshot in the docStandards:1~ Pre-round prep: prep becomes atrocious when you make people sift through 20 word docs to figure out which links you're reading and which impacts to prep. Discourages tricks—you can just hide a bunch of blippy arguments. Also key for inclusion since disadvantaged people have computers more prone to lag and even 3 or 4 can crash the program for them—outweighs accessibility is a multiplier for their impacts. Disclosing in cite boxes solves—people can quickly get a summary of your position and go to open source if they need more information2~ wiki rules—the wiki tells you to disclose like everyone else. Freeloading is bad and o/w—it cultivates passive citizenship and turns any hope of actually solving their impacts which is a voter for education. | 9/25/21 |
1 - Multiple MetaethicsTournament: Yale University Invitational 2021 | Round: 5 | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: Herrera, David | 9/18/21 |
1 - Read All AloudTournament: Yale University Invitational 2021 | Round: 5 | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: Herrera, David Interpretation – Debaters must read everything that they want to be relevant in the round. To clarify, all analytics and definitions must be read in order for it to be relevant on the flow in round.Violation – they don'tStandards:1~ Infinite Abuse – their model of debate justifies putting any number of things in the doc that they no longer have to read ranging anywhere from preempts to plan texts to aprioris. Kills fairness since I don't know how these arguments affect the round until I've already conceded them. Outweighs A~ it's structural abuse that can't be compensated via better debating B~ accessibility – people with cognitive or motor disabilities can struggle with a prioris especially hidden ones2~ Time Skew – I have to respond to arguments that take them no time to make if I want to go for T or a disad that doesn't link under your definition. Outweighs A~ it's structural abuse because it requires me to fulfil a burden that they don't have to B~ magnitude – it's infinite abuse because it's zero time for them – the time loss is proportion is definitionally infinite C~ it's a resolvable time skew whereas other skews like the 1ar are ingrained D~ reversibility – 1nc is our first and only chance to generate offense so we need to maximize our chances3~ Fair version – read it aloud or extempt a version of the graph. It's not infinitely regressive – A~ we only defend this norm not every specification B~ lay debaters do it – that flips reasonability and means err negative because it's a predictable normFairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation. Outweighs because it's the only intrinsic part of debate – all other rules can be debated over but rely on some conception of fairness to be justified.Drop the debater – a~ deter future abuse and b~ set better norms for debate.Competing interps – ~a~ reasonability is arbitrary and encourages judge intervention since there's no clear norm, ~b~ it creates a race to the top where we create the best possible norms for debate.No RVIs – a~ illogical, you don't win for proving that you meet the burden of being fair, logic outweighs since it's a prerequisite for evaluating any other argument, b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices | 9/18/21 |
1 - Round ReportsTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll AS | Judge: Salazar, Davd Interp: Debaters must disclose round reports on the 2021-2022 NDCA LD wiki for every round they have debated this season. Round reports disclose which positions (AC, NC, K, T, Theory, etc.) were read/gone for in every speech.Violation: screenshot in the doc – they have noneStandards:1~ Level Playing Field – big schools can go around and collect flows but independents are left in the dark so round reports are key for them to prep- they give you an idea of overall what layers debaters like going for so you can best prepare your strategy against them. Accessibility first and independent voter – it's an impact multiplier.2~ Strategy Education – round reports help novices understand the context in which positions are read by good debaters and help with brainstorming potential 1NCs vs affs – helps compensate for kids who can't afford coaches to prep out affs.3~ Pre-round prep –1ARs gives especially give an idea of what type of debater someone is – they could go for 1AR theory every round– otherwise I enter every round unknowing whereas you have an idea of what you want to go for from the start – key to good clash4~ Data collection – round reports are key to statistical analysis of LD debateZhang 1/22 Peter Zhang, 1-22-2021, "Disclosure in Numbers by Peter Zhang," Briefly, https://www.vbriefly.com/2021/01/22/disclosure-in-numbers-by-peter-zhang/?fbclid=IwAR0q5uCO74vLhYipH8QEO0PrLhY7CiIOwlEJUWEmnIVdqCmlM-jC4A-8rk0 LEX JB Data collection outweighs on norming – a) allows us to be accurate with our findings to see which norms are good and which norms are aren't b) data collection allows us to see if norming is working – means it comes lexically prior to any shells read in this round~1~ DTD on disclosure – a) disclosure cannot be drop the argument because it would just drop you because you're the norm b) deterrence, also dropping them is key now because it's the beginning of the season which is key to norms creation~2~ Reject all responses to disclosure – they disclose open source which concedes the validity of disclosure being good – anything else is a doubleturn~3~ No RVI on disclosure – a) prevents people from checking back for bad disclosure – means we never get better wikis because they're afraid to lose off the RVI b) they know that people will read disclosure on them so they prep a counterinterp just to win off the RVI – leads to infinitely abusive norms~4~ CI – 1~ reasonability is arbitrary – impossible to know what is reasonable until you establish a brightline 2~ bites judge intervention cuz they have to gut check what they think is good 3~ reasonability collapses cuz u use offense defense to evaluate offense under the BL 4~ norms – you can sidestep norms by selectively choosing a different brightline you meet every round.~5~ Disclosure outweighs – it's key to assessing the honesty of the form of your argumentation and how you presented arguments which means it precludes 1AC claims.~6~ Fairness is a voter because debate is a game governed by rules and you can't tell who actually won if the layer was skewed. | 9/11/21 |
1 - Spec MetaethicTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: Triples | Opponent: Southlake Carroll SD | Judge: Stuckert, James Interpretation – the affirmative must specify the metaethic of their ethical theory/framework in the delineated text of the 1ACViolation – they don't~1~ Resolvability – Metaethics is a key question when debating moral obligation – it explores questions that a simple "the standard is" can't solve for – that's also a reason to vote negative on substance because it's a reason I couldn't truth test itSayre-Mccord 12 ~Sayre-Mccord, Geoff, 1-23-2007 substantive revision Thu Jan 26, 2012, "Metaethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)," No Publication, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaethics LEX JB~ ~2~ Extinction – the question and discussion of metaethics is key to solve collapse and extinction of the galaxy, discussion is key – we have at best 40 more years and it won't wait for us to have sloppy phil debatesMuehlhauser 11 ~Muehlhauser, Luke (Executive director at the Singularity Institute). "The Urgent Meta-Ethics of Friendly Artificial Intelligence." LessWrong. 01 February 2011. http://lesswrong.com/lw/43v/the_urgent_metaethics_of_friendly_artificial~~ Reject uncarded responses – study of quantum physics requires evidence from smart scholars~3~ Phil debate – two internal links – a) frameworks fail to provide an ought statement if they don't explore the natural state of agents or the actor in the resolution – independent voter because we can't correctly discuss the moral worth of an action b) I can't ask questions about it in 1AC CX which kills access to novices trying to learn – outweighs on inclusion~4~ Strat skew – two internal links a) absent specification the NC loses access to framework k's, metaethic debate, metahijacks, hijacks etc. for example, a metaethic can be used to frame out a kritik, but the NC loses access to this and the 1AR can shift into one that's reactive b) even if I specify my own in the 1NC, I can't contest yours until the 2NR which means you moot 7 minutes of the 1NC and this cause latebreaking framing debates, and the metaethic debate is skewed 7-6 favoring aff~5~ Engagement – specifying in the 1AC means we can have more engagement about the phil | 9/12/21 |
1 - Spec ValueTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 5 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit MS | Judge: Quisenberry, Jack Interpretation – the affirmative must specify the value and value criterion in the 1AC. For example, they must say something like "my value is morality/justice"Violation – they don'tVote neg~1~ Resolvability – not knowing what the overarching goal makes the debate irresolvable because the judge doesn't know what to filter through frameworks – independent voter because every round needs a winnerHalvorson Koshy 13 ~Dr. Seth Halvorson and Cherian Koshy, 2013 by the National Speech and Debate Association All rights reserved, DR. SETH HALVORSON Ph.D., Columbia University (NY) CHERIAN KOSHY, National Speech and Debate Association; formerly of Apple Valley HS (MN), Dr. Halvorson and Mr. Koshy both debated for Apple Valley High School in Minnesota during the 1990s and were the two Minnesota State Champions from Apple Valley during that decade. Over the course of the last 15 years, both Dr. Halvorson and Mr. Koshy have spent summers traveling the country, teaching students about Lincoln-Douglas debate. Each summer, they work with hundreds of students who are interested in developing their skills and learning about LD debate. They also coach teams throughout the year, and the students they have coached have been immensely successful on the local, state, regional, and national levels, including impressive finishes at the Tournament of Champions and National Speech and Debate Tournament. Over the course of the last 15 years, they have taught thousands of students how to debate, including many current coaches and judges in the activity. In 2006, after spending several summers together, they designed a series of instructional materials they believe will be useful for students, coaches, parents, and judges new to the activity of competitive debate. In 2008, the second edition of the text was published including updated material and information., https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Lincoln-Douglas-Debate-Textbook.pdf LEX JB~ ~2~ Inclusion – novice or traditional debaters always use values and the lack of one excludes them from the space because a) I would be confused if I didn't know the overarching goal of the debate b) value debates are core questions of novice and traditional debates, their counterinterp will justify excluding certain circuits, but mine allows for all of them to engage. Also, any answer to this shell is just a reason to go do policy or PF, values and value criterions are unique to LD which is a reason why it outweighs – proves no regress.~3~ Strat skew – two internal links a) absent a specified value you can shift ie. values can implicate to negative util which would take out case turns like "death good", permissibility triggers based on a value, also things like logcon require a conception of value, hijacks to role of the ballots, answers to TJFs – that's a unique reason why it has to be in the 1AC and also in circuit debate b) I can't respond to your value in the 1NC which moots 7 minutes of value debate.Specifying my own value in the 1NC or specifying in the 1AR doesn't solve because a) if it was in the 1AC, I would have the NC to respond to the value b) causes a 4-6-3 timeskew on the value debate, and you would be reactive to my value and shift in the 1AR after encouraging a strategic error c) it's not my burden to dictate your affirmative, the aff is the stasis point for contestation which justifies affirmatives having everything in the aff, not the NC to have it | 9/26/21 |
2 - Dewey KTournament: Yale University Invitational 2021 | Round: 5 | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: Herrera, David Dewey's pragmatist philosophy discounts the materiality of racism and legitimizes institutional violence- he also personally endorsed exclusionary viewpoints – this is perpetuated by every tag in the framework and citing DeweyJones 12: John Wesley Jones. John Dewey and Cultural Racism. University of Illinois, 2012. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/42217/John_Jones.pdf?sequence=1. RW | 9/18/21 |
2 - GentTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 2 | Opponent: Sharon RG | Judge: Jasani, Aryan Your rhetoric of the word "paralysis" is an independent voting issue for ableism – use 'freeze' instead. This is perpetuated by their use of this word in 1AC Murray 17
| 9/25/21 |
2 - K - PsychoanalysisTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 4 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward MA | Judge: Robinson, Tajaih The subject emerges through alienation by attempting to explain one's desires through language, which always has a communicability gap from the real world. This leads to a constant and impossible desire to fufill the lost object which justifies infinite violence. Thus the role of the ballot is to Traverse the Fantasy which means exposing drives.McGowan 13, McGowan, Todd. Enjoying What We Don't Have: The Political Project of Psychoanalysis. University of Nebraska Press, 2013. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ddr7nv. Accessed 19 Sept. 2020. AT Their deployment of debate is an agential fantasy – the affirmative is an investment into subjectivity as a teleological entity dependent on external recognition to satisfy its goals, which is addicting and causes passivityLundberg 12 Dr. Christian Lundberg, 2012, "Lacan in Public: Psychoanalysis and the Science of Rhetoric," The University of Alabama Press, Dr. Lundberg is an associate professor and co-director of the University Program in Cultural Studies at UNC, he has a B.A. from the University of Redlands, a Master of Divinity from Emory University, and a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from Northwestern University, sjbe That destroys politics, ethics, and the value to lifeRuti '14 (mari, English, Toronto, Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society (2014) 19, 297–314) SJBE, recut from Harvard BoSu Vote negative to embrace the lack, this means accepting the anxiety from the encounter with the other and exposing drives, its Uncondo not a floating PikMcGowan 2, McGowan, Todd. Enjoying What We Don't Have: The Political Project of Psychoanalysis. University of Nebraska Press, 2013. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ddr7nv. Accessed 19 Sept. 2020. AT | 9/26/21 |
3 - CP - 21 SavageTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 4 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward MA | Judge: Robinson, Tajaih CP text: The member nations of the world trade organization should right the wrongs of colonialism through the embodiment of 21 Savage.The arrest of 21 Savage is something greater than an ICE investigation. It is an operation by corporatist capitalism to silence immigrants who historically speak up against it, like issues of environmentalism. The way that capitalism structures a system of corporatism proactively excludes immigrants who have their lives destroyedAhmad 20 ~Ahmad, Nadia, Climate Cages: Connecting Migration, the Carceral State, Extinction Rebellion, and the Coronavirus through Cicero and 21 Savage (July 21, 2020). Loyola Law Review, New Orleans, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3657096 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3657096 LEX JB~ Sheyaa's lyricism can redefine subjectivities and break down borders, enhancing cultural range and changing political narratives – controls the internal link to movement building. Answers their prefiat offense and has my own.Morgan Bennett 11 ~Marcyliena Morgan and Dionne Bennett "Hip-Hop and the Global Imprint of a Black Cultural Form" Daedalus , Spring 2011, Vol. 140, No. 2, Race, Inequality and Culture, volume 2 (Spring 2011), pp. 176-196 The MIT Press on behalf of American Academy of Arts and Sciences https://www.jstor.org/stable/23047460 LEX JB~ | 9/26/21 |
3 - FW - Util v1Tournament: Yale University Invitational 2021 | Round: 4 | Opponent: Park City NL | Judge: Rao, Anand Framework~1~ Ethics must begin in the external worldA) Action Guiding – anything else means it can't influence action because action only happens externally – abstraction can't explain everyday decisions like the trolley problemB) Naturalism – only moral naturalism can explain the influence of moral facts on the physical worldPapineau 07 David ~Professor of Philosophy King's College London~, First published Thu Feb 22, 2007; substantive revision Tue Mar 31, 2020 https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/~~#MorFac C) Evolution – only a naturalistic understanding of the world explains it.Lutz and Lenman 18 Lutz, Matthew and Lenman, James, "Moral Naturalism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/naturalism-moral/. Massa ~2~ Ethics must solve the problem of regress, else you can infinitely question why should I follow this? Util meets – Pleasure and pain are the starting point for moral reasoning—they're our most baseline desires and the only things that explain the intrinsic value of objects or actionsMoen 16, Ole Martin (PhD, Research Fellow in Philosophy at University of Oslo). "An Argument for Hedonism." Journal of Value Inquiry 50.2 (2016): 267. ~3~ Extinction outweighsA) Reversibility – we can never improve society because our impact is irreversible which proves moral uncertaintyB) Prerequisite – you can't do the aff if you're dead, threats to bodily security preclude actionC) Resolvability – body count is the most objective way to calculate impacts because comparing suffering is unethical anything else means judge interventionD) Reciprocity – you can weigh your impacts under different frameworks, I should be able to as wellE) Phil education – MacAskill 14~William, Oxford Philosopher and youngest tenured philosopher in the world, Normative Uncertainty, 2014~ F) Uncertainty – we've been debating about ethics for centuries – if we're uncertain we should default to keeping us alive to keep learningThus, the standard is act hedonistic utilPrefer additionally –~1~ Actor Spec – Util is the best in the context of governments which is the actor in the resolutionA) Governments must aggregate since every policy benefits some and harms others, which also means side constraints freeze action.B) No act-omission distinction governments are responsible for everything in the public sphere so inaction is an implicit authorization of actionC) No intent foresight distinction for states.Enoch 07 Enoch, D ~The Faculty of Law, The Hebrew Unviersity, Mount Scopus Campus, Jersusalem~. (2007). INTENDING, FORESEEING, AND THE STATE. Legal Theory, 13(02). doi:10.1017/s1352325207070048 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/legal-theory/article/intending-foreseeing-and-the-state/76B18896B94D5490ED0512D8E8DC54B2 D) Actor-specificity comes first since different agents have different ethical standings. Takes out util calc indicts since they're empirically denied and link turns them because the alt would be no action~2~ Skepticism – all ethics try to define meaning in action, but they haven't answered why we even try to find a universal obligation. Pleasure is the one naturally valuable thing that's given to us which means it's the only true theory to us as humans | 9/18/21 |
SO - 1NC - Kant v1Tournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: 3 | Opponent: Elkins RS | Judge: Sun, Favian | 9/11/21 |
SO - 1NC - Kant v2Tournament: Yale University Invitational 2021 | Round: 1 | Opponent: Oak Grove AA | Judge: Lee, Andrew | 9/17/21 |
SO - CP - WHOTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: 3 | Opponent: Elkins RS | Judge: Sun, Favian | 9/11/21 |
SO - DA - ILawTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll AS | Judge: Salazar, Davd The WTO has been seen as ineffective but has the opportunity to bounce back with strong international buy inNgozi Okonjo-Iweala, 20, Reviving the WTO, https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/reviving-the-wto/, Brookings, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is a nonresident distinguished fellow with the Africa Growth Initiative in the Global Economy and Development program at Brookings. She is an economist and international development expert with over 30 years of experience. Intellectual property rights cannot be discriminated on the basis of field, or place of inventionWTO https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_04c_e.htm, Article 27.1, Section 5 on patents, World trade Organization, WTO, Part II — Standards concerning the availability, scope and use of Intellectual Property Rights The WTO's appellate body no longer exists to mediate disputes, without immediate buy in by states, and no mechanism to make disobedient states obey, the system collapsesHorton, 08/3, Lessons from Trump's assault on the World Trade Organization, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/08/lessons-trumps-assault-world-trade-organization, Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank, Communications Manager; Project Lead, Common Futures Conversations A major country operating outside WTO consensus wrecks global trade normsBacchus 20 ~James Bacchus, member of the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies, the Distinguished University Professor of Global Affairs and director of the Center for Global Economic and Environmental Opportunity at the University of Central Florida, 12-16-2020, "An Unnecessary Proposal: A WTO Waiver of Intellectual Property Rights for COVID-19 Vaccines," Cato Institute, https://www.cato.org/free-trade-bulletin/unnecessary-proposal-wto-waiver-intellectual-property-rights-covid-19-vaccines~~/Kankee Collapse of the WTO triggers an inevitable global warRaymond J. Waldmann, Corporate Counsel and Secretary for AuBeta Networks Inc and former vice president of international relations and as director of government affairs for The Boeing Company and assistant U.S. Secretary of Commerce for international economic policy (1981-83) and chair of the Seattle Host Committees for the 1999 WTO Ministerial Meeting, "WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION IMPORTANT TO CITIZENS OF CITY AND STATE, Seattle-Post Intelligencer, 5/11/99, WTO cred solves wars that go nuclear.Hamann 09 ~Georgia; 2009; J.D. Candidate, Vanderbilt University Law School; "Replacing Slingshots with Swords: Implications of the Antigua-Gambling 22.6 Panel Report for Developing Countries and the World Trading System," VANDERBILT JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW, http://www.jogoremoto.pt/docs/extra/duqJ53.pdf~~ Justin | 9/11/21 |
SO - PIC - WeedTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll AS | Judge: Salazar, Davd The member nations of the World Trade Organization should reduce intellectual property protections for medicines except for marijuana.It competes! – Marijuana is medicine and has multiple medical usesGrinspoon 20 ~Peter Grinspoon, 4-10-2020, "Medical marijuana," Harvard Health, https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/medical-marijuana-2018011513085 JB~ Weed booming now.Agustin et al. 20 ~Alejandro Agustin, Jorge Alvarado, Gerardo Cardenas, Talia Towe, Breonna Vann, December 7, 2020, "The Economic Rise of Marijuana", https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/4c839fb0499a453d88be4ab862a96f37 JB~ IP is the driving factor for innovation, participation, and operation of the weed industry.Sander 16 ~Jason Sander. "Patenting Cannabis Strains – Good or Bad?" June 8, 2016, Jason is a versatile writer and marketer with twelve years of experience serving clients. He couples this expertise with a passion for cannabis businesses and the science of medical marijuana, https://www.marijuanatimes.org/patenting-cannabis-strains-good-or-bad JB~ Otherwise that's extinction – weed industry collapses 1AC evidenceThese cards also answer the affirmative and link turn it. | 9/11/21 |
SO - T - CurrentTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: Triples | Opponent: Southlake Carroll SD | Judge: Stuckert, James Interpretation – Reduce means current—-not preventing future action. The 1AC must defend an immediate actionNaporn Popattanachai 18. This thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of Nottingham Trent University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Law. "Regional Cooperation Addressing Marine Pollution from Land-Based Activities: an Interpretation of Article 207 of The Law OF THE SEA CONVENTION FOCUSING on Monitoring, Assessement, and Surveillance of the Pollution" http://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/33374/1/Naporn20Popattanachai202018.pdf Violation: their plan text says delayVote negative for textuality – the actors in the resolution are members of the WTO and evidence from court operates within the WTO's jurisdiction.~1~ Predictability – the resolution is the stasis point for contestation, anything else would be unpredictable and an unfair prep burden for the negative. Their counterinterp will justify jettisoning any possible aspect of the topic which explodes predictable limits for prep~2~ Topic education – only our interpretation allows for the most nuanced clash pertaining to what parameters in which the actors in the resolution act. Anything else doesn't actually talk about the topic because it's not what the actors are allowed to fiat. | 9/12/21 |
SO - T - LeslieTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Harrison AA | Judge: Krause, Lukas - Quisenberry, Jack - tanguturi, nikita Interpretation: "medicines" is a generic bare plural. The aff may not defend WTO member nations reducing intellectual property protections for a subset of medicines.The upward entailment test and adverb test determine the genericity of a bare pluralLeslie and Lerner 16 ~Sarah-Jane Leslie, Ph.D., Princeton, 2007. Dean of the Graduate School and Class of 1943 Professor of Philosophy. Served as the vice dean for faculty development in the Office of the Dean of the Faculty, director of the Program in Linguistics, and founding director of the Program in Cognitive Science at Princeton University. Adam Lerner, PhD Philosophy, Postgraduate Research Associate, Princeton 2018. From 2018, Assistant Professor/Faculty Fellow in the Center for Bioethics at New York University. Member of the Princeton Social Neuroscience Lab.~ "Generic Generalizations." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. April 24, 2016. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/generics/ TG
It applies to "medicines" – 1~ upward entailment test – "reduce intellectual property protections for medicines" doesn't entail reducing protections for aids, because it doesn't prove that we should derestrict other beneficial tech, 2~ adverb test – member nations "ought to usually reduce intellectual property protections for medicines" doesn't substantially change resolutional meaning, 3~ predicate level – the rez is an individual level predicate not a stage level because moral obligations in ought statements are long-lasting as opposed to fleeting phasesViolation – they only defend diabetes medicineVote neg:1~ Limits – you can pick anything from COVID vaccines to HIV/AIDS to random biotech to insulin treatments and there's no universal disad since each one has a different function and implication for health, tech, and relations – explodes neg prep and leads to random medicine of the week affs which makes cutting stable neg links impossible. PICs don't solve – it's absurd to say neg potential abuse justifies the aff being flat out not T, which leads to a race towards abuse. Limits key to reciprocal engagement since they create a caselist for neg prep.2~ TVA – read the aff as an advantage to a whole rez aff.T outweighs 1ar theory – a) norms – topic for 2 months, theory can be anytime b) if I was abusive it was because you forced me into it | 9/27/21 |
SO - T - TemporaryTournament: Grapevine Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll AS | Judge: Salazar, Davd Interpretation: Reductions are permanentReynolds 59. Judge (In the Matter of Doris A. Montesani, Petitioner, v. Arthur Levitt, as Comptroller of the State of New York, et al., Respondents ~NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL~ Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Third Department 9 A.D.2d 51; 189 N.Y.S.2d 695; 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7391 August 13, 1959) Violation: the COVID enforcement cards talk about a temporary waiveringVote negative for textuality – the actors in the resolution are members of the WTO and evidence from court operates within the WTO's jurisdiction.~1~ Predictability – the resolution is the stasis point for contestation, anything else would be unpredictable and an unfair prep burden for the negative. Their counterinterp will justify jettisoning any possible aspect of the topic which explodes predictable limits for prep~2~ Topic education – only our interpretation allows for the most nuanced clash pertaining to what parameters in which the actors in the resolution act. Anything else doesn't actually talk about the topic because it's not what the actors are allowed to fiat. | 9/11/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
9/11/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/11/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/12/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/25/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/26/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/26/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/17/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/18/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
| |
9/18/21 | 23bai@lexingtonmaorg |
|