Strake Jesuit Arcos Neg
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple Valley | 2 | Harker AS | Gordon Krauss |
|
|
| |
| Apple Valley | 4 | Lexington JB | Phoenix Pittman |
|
|
| |
| Apple Valley | 5 | West Des Moines Valley MM | Breigh Plat |
|
|
| |
| Blue Key | 2 | Basis Silicon Valley SK | Arjan Kang |
|
|
| |
| Blue Key | 5 | American Heritage Broward SS | Keshav Dandu |
|
|
| |
| Blue Key | 3 | King CP | Blake Ochoa |
|
|
| |
| Churchill | 2 | Claudia Taylor AP | Breigh Plat |
|
|
| |
| Churchill | 2 | Claudia Taylor AP | Breigh Plat |
|
|
| |
| Glenbrooks | 2 | Harker SY | Lukas Krause |
|
|
| |
| Glenbrooks | 4 | Durham SA | Silma Bathily |
|
|
| |
| Glenbrooks | 6 | American Heritage Broward EB | Tajaih Robinson |
|
|
| |
| Glenbrooks | 4 | Durham SA | Silma Bathily |
|
|
| |
| Glenbrooks | 7 | Millburn ST | Phoenix Pittman |
|
|
| |
| Grapevine | 3 | St agnes EH | Samantha Mcloughlin |
|
|
| |
| Heart of texas | 5 | Harvard-Westlake JH | Albert Cardenas |
|
|
| |
| Heart of texas | 3 | Harker RM | Eric He |
|
|
| |
| Heart of texas | 2 | Tays KM | Sam Larson |
|
|
| |
| Heart of texas | Doubles | Lexington AK | Aaron Timmons, Barquin, Faizaan Dossani |
|
|
| |
| Longhorn Classic | 2 | Little Rock Central MG | Devin hernandez |
|
|
| |
| Longhorn Classic | 4 | Greenhill NT | David Dosch |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 1 | harvard westlake AW | Ishan rereddy |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 3 | Mcneil SC | Truman Le |
|
|
| |
| Loyola | 6 | Independant WW | Dylan Jones |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 1 | Princeton DR | Spencer Orlowski |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 3 | Lexington JB | Breigh Plat |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | Triples | Iowa City West NW | Tajaih Robinson, Breigh Plat, Rohit Lakshman |
|
|
| |
| Mid America Cup | 6 | American Heritage Broward SS | Tajaih Robinson |
|
|
| |
| NSD camp | 1 | Mathew Moon | shrey |
|
|
| |
| NSD camp | 4 | Jet sun | Cameron McConway |
|
|
| |
| NSD camp | 6 | Princeton ML | Connor self |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 6 | Unionville MG | Annie Wang |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 1 | Scripps Ranch AS | Curtis Chang |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 5 | Millburn WW | Scopa |
|
|
| |
| any | Finals | any | any |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Apple Valley | 2 | Opponent: Harker AS | Judge: Gordon Krauss 1ac- europe |
| Apple Valley | 4 | Opponent: Lexington JB | Judge: Phoenix Pittman 1ac-kant |
| Apple Valley | 5 | Opponent: West Des Moines Valley MM | Judge: Breigh Plat 1ac-asian identity |
| Blue Key | 2 | Opponent: Basis Silicon Valley SK | Judge: Arjan Kang 1ac- Pragmatism |
| Blue Key | 5 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward SS | Judge: Keshav Dandu 1ac- Levinas |
| Blue Key | 3 | Opponent: King CP | Judge: Blake Ochoa 1ac- Disability |
| Churchill | 2 | Opponent: Claudia Taylor AP | Judge: Breigh Plat 1ac- dsyfluency |
| Churchill | 2 | Opponent: Claudia Taylor AP | Judge: Breigh Plat 1ac- dsyfluency |
| Glenbrooks | 2 | Opponent: Harker SY | Judge: Lukas Krause 1ac-Europe |
| Glenbrooks | 4 | Opponent: Durham SA | Judge: Silma Bathily 1ac- india |
| Glenbrooks | 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward EB | Judge: Tajaih Robinson 1ac- antiblackness |
| Glenbrooks | 4 | Opponent: Durham SA | Judge: Silma Bathily 1ac- india |
| Glenbrooks | 7 | Opponent: Millburn ST | Judge: Phoenix Pittman 1ac- Pettit |
| Grapevine | 3 | Opponent: St agnes EH | Judge: Samantha Mcloughlin 1ac- Covid |
| Heart of texas | 5 | Opponent: Harvard-Westlake JH | Judge: Albert Cardenas 1ac- Covid |
| Heart of texas | 3 | Opponent: Harker RM | Judge: Eric He 1ac- Pandemics |
| Heart of texas | 2 | Opponent: Tays KM | Judge: Sam Larson 1ac-Covid |
| Heart of texas | Doubles | Opponent: Lexington AK | Judge: Aaron Timmons, Barquin, Faizaan Dossani 1ac-trips |
| Longhorn Classic | 2 | Opponent: Little Rock Central MG | Judge: Devin hernandez 1ac- Asain identity |
| Longhorn Classic | 4 | Opponent: Greenhill NT | Judge: David Dosch 1ac-germany |
| Loyola | 1 | Opponent: harvard westlake AW | Judge: Ishan rereddy 1ac-COVID medicines |
| Loyola | 3 | Opponent: Mcneil SC | Judge: Truman Le 1ac-biopiracy |
| Loyola | 6 | Opponent: Independant WW | Judge: Dylan Jones 1ac-baudrillard |
| Mid America Cup | 1 | Opponent: Princeton DR | Judge: Spencer Orlowski 1ac-evergreening |
| Mid America Cup | 3 | Opponent: Lexington JB | Judge: Breigh Plat 1ac-semiocap round reports |
| Mid America Cup | Triples | Opponent: Iowa City West NW | Judge: Tajaih Robinson, Breigh Plat, Rohit Lakshman 1ac- libertarianism |
| Mid America Cup | 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward SS | Judge: Tajaih Robinson 1ac-kant |
| NSD camp | 1 | Opponent: Mathew Moon | Judge: shrey 1ac-justice |
| NSD camp | 4 | Opponent: Jet sun | Judge: Cameron McConway 1ac-teacher unions |
| NSD camp | 6 | Opponent: Princeton ML | Judge: Connor self 1ac- kant |
| Yale | 6 | Opponent: Unionville MG | Judge: Annie Wang 1ac-covid |
| Yale | 1 | Opponent: Scripps Ranch AS | Judge: Curtis Chang 1ac- spinoza |
| Yale | 5 | Opponent: Millburn WW | Judge: Scopa 1ac-Hegel |
| any | Finals | Opponent: any | Judge: any contact info |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
0-navigationTournament: any | Round: Finals | Opponent: any | Judge: any | 7/8/21 |
1-Theory- Combo Shell v2Tournament: Blue Key | Round: 2 | Opponent: Basis Silicon Valley SK | Judge: Arjan Kang Interp: may not read no neg arguments, reject neg fairness concerns, aff theory first, no 2nr I meetsStandard infinate abuse-Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation, ows because it’s the only intrinsic part of debate, all other rules can be debated over but rely on fairness to be justified 2~ fairness is a pre-requisite to engaging in other argumentsDrop 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. ~C~ reasonability collapses to competing interps since it becomes a battle between two competing BrightlinesNo RVIs – a~ illogical, you don’t win for proving that you meet the burden of being fair, b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices C~ encourages making the whole round theory which detracts from substance education D~ they are the logic of crimilization overpunishing people of color trying to create productive discourseNC theory Ows- the 1nc only read theory because the AC was abusive, 2) lexicality- it indicts practices that occur earlier in the round 3) reciprocity- we each have two speeches to debate other speeches have unequal response abilitiesMeta theory ows- it indicts the initial reading of their shell | 11/5/21 |
1-Theory- Must disclose contact infoTournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Millburn WW | Judge: Scopa 1Interpretation: Debaters must have a cite listing their contact information on the 2020-2021 NDCA LD wiki 30 minutes before their round.Violation: They don’t – Screenshots in doc
Standards:1. Pre round prep – it would be impossible to contact you before round, since I don’t know who to or your preferred contact – destroys preround prep because you could be breaking new, or making changes to your aff and I wouldn’t even know. Outweighs, since preround prep is a gateway issue to engagement.2. Clash – I could know more about your aff if I asked questions about it preround, which is key to indepth clash in round, otherwise you can get away with sneaky 1AR pivots.D. VoterFairness is a voter—debate is a competitive activity that requires objective evaluation. Education is a voter – it is the terminal impact of debate.Drop the debater – a~ deter future abuse and b~ set better norms for debate. C~ the shell indicts the whole aff, anything else is severanceCompeting 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, O/ws since it’s a prerequisite to evauating args b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices C~ Substantive education, encourages going all in theory which kills substantive education | 9/27/21 |
1-Theory- Paraphrasing badTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: Triples | Opponent: Iowa City West NW | Judge: Tajaih Robinson, Breigh Plat, Rohit Lakshman Interpretation: when evidence is introduced in round, it must be read as a full cut card and not paraphrased.Violation: they paraphrase the definitions for truth testingStandards:1) Evidence Ethics- Paraphrasing reduces ev to biased two-sentence summaries – proven by the widespread use of misconstrued evidence. Cards ensure tags are grounded in direct quotes and make it easier to check for misrepresentation which deters cheating.Independently true of their Billious Pills card – read their evidence for anywhere it talks about a "gimmick" – that’s independently bad because it is their first example of how the patent system has been gamed.That’s an IVI- A~ Credibility B~ Longevity C~ Truth Testing 2) Prep skew- If we want to know the quote of their evidence, not only does it require us to use prep time while they don’t have to, but it also takes longer to read through the parts they paraphrased than our quotes. | 9/27/21 |
1-Theory- Race burdens badTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward EB | Judge: Tajaih Robinson | 11/21/21 |
1-Theory- T-Framework v2Tournament: Longhorn Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Little Rock Central MG | Judge: Devin hernandez | 12/4/21 |
1-Theory- TJFs badTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 7 | Opponent: Millburn ST | Judge: Phoenix Pittman | 11/21/21 |
1-Theory- evidence ethicsTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: Triples | Opponent: Iowa City West NW | Judge: Tajaih Robinson, Breigh Plat, Rohit Lakshman 1Interpretation: Debaters must not cut cards in the middle of a paragraph.Violation – its egregious – the card ends before the last sentence THAT JUSTIFIES A UTIL SPIN – says that we should maximize the pleasure of other agents – you should also hold the line on the 1ar reasonability arguments since there wasn’t even a link to the pdf which supercharges abuse.Screenshots here: Standard is academic ethics – cutting the card in the middle of a paragraph is a voter – their ev starts and ends in the middle – misrepresents authors intent because paragraphs are how authors delineate arguments. Also allows debaters to manipulate evidence and strategically leave out what contradicts with their arguments – putting rest of the uncut paragraph in the doc solves all your offense unless your intent was to cheat which is even worse.Academic ethics is a voter and ow a) what we gain from debate means nothing if we’re academically dishonest and have no cred, b) the purpose of debate is to prepare debaters for the real world, and academic dishonesty is punished irl c) if they’re willing to be manipulate their evidence, be epistemically suspect of all of it, especially if they have intentionally cut out a part of the card that proves their theory wrongNo RVI’s on ev ethics violations – you don’t win for proving that you were academically honest and that’s ridiculous. Saying "we meet" checks abuse. RVI’s bad, they deter from checking actual abuse and justify 100 apriori non inherent affs.Drop the debater: it’s academic misconduct that should disqualify any other argument they make from counting. Doing good on a test doesn’t matter if you cheated. That’s a side constraint on their fairness offense so even if they win a spike the shell outweighs.The 1AR will make appeals to reasonability or intention – reject them:1~ All our violations prove the aff is unreasonable and you should not believe any of their appeals since their author literally says otherwise2~ Intent is irrelevant – we should be held accountable for the consequences of our actions. If they didn’t cut it it’s more egregious – they stole miscut cards from someone and clearly didn’t bother to check. The fact that they recut it should prove its not an accident – they checked AND STILL left it out3~ It makes reading unethical ev no cost – if they’re caught, they can go for other things, if they’re not caught they get to win on no cost ev4~ Reject the team for deterrence – letting them win encourages the practice5~ Competing interps – reasonability’s arbitrary and collapses to an offense defense paradigm | 9/27/21 |
1-theory- New affs badTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward SS | Judge: Tajaih Robinson Interpretation: Debaters must disclose the advantage area and standard text to their new affirmative to their opponent 30 minutes before the round.
Violation: I asked and you chose not to disclose~1~ Limits – unbroken standard and advantag areas are infinitely unpredictable – they’ll always win with cheap shot affs that we can’t prep. Giving only plan and standard text preserves sufficient affirmative flexibility by allowing your warrant to be new, but also allows the 1nc a chance of engaging.~2~ Argument quality: standard text disclosure discourages cheap shot aff’s with frings authors and shoddy solvency. If the aff isn’t inherent or easily defeated by 20 minutes of research, the case should lose. They had a month to prep – the neg is entitled to some research time to make sure the AFF is inherent, topical, and controversial. Outweighs on argument quality and innovation – kills education only portable impact and encourages unfairnessFairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation. Education’s a voter – terminal impact of debateDrop 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, b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices C~ encourages making the whole round theory which detracts from substance education D~ they are the logic of crimilization trying to | 9/27/21 |
1-theory- Nibs badTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 3 | Opponent: Lexington JB | Judge: Breigh Plat | 9/26/21 |
1-theory- combo shell v1Tournament: NSD camp | Round: 6 | Opponent: Princeton ML | Judge: Connor self 1Interpretation: Debaters may not justify 1ar theory is dtd, no rvi, competing interps, and it’s the highest layerViolation: its all in the underviewStandard: Infinite Abuse - their norm justifies the affirmative auto winning every round since they can read 500 risk free 1AR shell with DTD and Competing interps making it impossible for me to answer all of them letting them collapse in the 2ar. if I try to uplayer the shell and read meta theory to get an out in the 2NR I can’t since your shell is the highest layer. Answering the argument doesn’t solve because you can read infinite of these paradigm issues in the 1ac making it impossible. Norming is an independent voter since justifying the value of debate necessarily justifies the norms of the activity being good in order for debate to be valuable.Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation. Education – its why schools fund debate and has portable impacts. Drop the debater – a~ indicts the aff so drop the arg is drop the debater. B~ to deter future abuse and set better normsCompeting 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, O/ws since it’s a litmus for other arguments b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices ~c~ encourages going all in on theory which kills substantive education ~D~ Discourages checking real abuse which outweighs on norm-setting ~e~ They are the logic of criminalization that over-punish people-of-color for trying to create productive discourse | 9/27/21 |
1-theory- combo shell v3Tournament: Blue Key | Round: 5 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward SS | Judge: Keshav Dandu Interpretation: debaters may not read 1ar theory first, Drop the debater, competing interps, and no 2nr I meetsStandard infinate abuse-Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation, ows because it’s the only intrinsic part of debate, all other rules can be debated over but rely on fairness to be justified 2~ fairness is a pre-requisite to engaging in other argumentsDrop 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. ~C~ reasonability collapses to competing interps since it becomes a battle between two competing BrightlinesNo RVIs – a~ illogical, you don’t win for proving that you meet the burden of being fair, b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices C~ encourages making the whole round theory which detracts from substance education D~ they are the logic of crimilization overpunishing people of color trying to create productive discourseNC theory Ows- the 1nc only read theory because the AC was abusive, 2) lexicality- it indicts practices that occur earlier in the round 3) reciprocity- we each have two speeches to debate other speeches have unequal response abilitiesMeta theory ows- it indicts the initial reading of their shell | 11/5/21 |
1-theory- identity burdens badTournament: Churchill | Round: 2 | Opponent: Claudia Taylor AP | Judge: Breigh Plat | 1/8/22 |
1-theory- identity burdens badTournament: Churchill | Round: 2 | Opponent: Claudia Taylor AP | Judge: Breigh Plat | 1/8/22 |
1-theory- must disclose plantextTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 2 | Opponent: Harker AS | Judge: Gordon Krauss | 11/20/21 |
1-theory- must have a standard textTournament: Loyola | Round: 6 | Opponent: Independant WW | Judge: Dylan Jones A~ Interpretation: The affirmative debater must read either a standard or role of the ballotB~ Violation: they don’tC~ Standards:1~ Advocacy Shift – I don’t know what matters under your framing – our ideas of what exactly matters may vary – means I can’t engage substantively. You just have a bunch of random cards which could be reinterpreted in the 1AR depending on the 1NC. For example, your JanFeb 2018 aff read rights first and util, which leaves 2 options for 1AR clarifications to evade neg offense.2~ Resolvability - no engagement or clear way to weigh between args makes it impossible to evaluate the round – invites arbitrary judge intervention.You can’t use your aff to exclude my shell. My shell indicts the fact that there is no stable metric to be evaluated against . If they go for K first that proves the abuse of my shell since they should have specified in the AC. | 9/7/21 |
1-theory- open sourceTournament: NSD camp | Round: 6 | Opponent: Princeton ML | Judge: Connor self Interpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions on open source with highlighting on the 2020-21 NDCA LD wiki after the round in which they read them.Violation –they don’t1~ Debate resource inequities—you’ll say people will steal cards, but that’s good—it’s the only way to truly level the playing field for students such as novices in under-privileged programs – it equals the playing field.Overing 18 – Bob Overing, LD Scholar ("Holiday Disclosure Post ~#6 – 10 Things Edition" JANUARY 12, 2018. http://www.premierdebate.com/disclosure-post-6/) AND online library offerings or teams without college coaches, this matters a lot. 2~ Evidence ethics – open source is the only way to verify pre-round that cards aren’t miscut or highlighted or bracketed unethically. That’s a voter – maintaining ethical ev practices is key to being good academics and we should be able to verify you didn’t cheat3~ Depth of clash – it allows debaters to have nuanced researched objections to their opponents evidence before the round at a much faster rate, which leads to higher quality ev comparison – outweighs cause thinking on your feet is NUQ but the best quality responses come from full access to a case. | 9/27/21 |
1-theory- super smash brosTournament: NSD camp | Round: 1 | Opponent: Mathew Moon | Judge: shrey Interp – Debaters must discuss the benefits of the resolution in relation to super smash bros i.e. talks about how a right to strike helps game developers in the 1AC. Its also on my wiki, I can show you if you want (under disclosure interps/pre round interps)A right to strike is bad for super smash bros because game developers would strike and that means there’re no game updates for super smash which is obv bad.Violation They didn’tVoters:Hand-eye Coordination – Science shows that Video Games increase Hand-Eye coordination which is an exportable skill – outweighs on magnitude since it helps with much more than just debate. Also key to physical health which in turns help mental health by preventing finger cramps – decks debate’s value if we’re too hurt to try debating.Community – Debate teaches us how to yell at each other about vacuous things like Kant and Nuclear War while Super Smash bros brings us together – key to generate Value to Life from personal friendships built in debateAccessibility – Not everyone can cut 10,000 cards and talk at break neck speeds but everyone can talk about Smash Bros – means we make debate reach more people which outweighs all your standards on Scope AND is the strongest internal link to fairnessVideo Gaming is a VI for Access, Education, Fairness, and Value to Life – Smash is the best game since 1) Everyone loves it based on community consensus, 2) Is available by emulator for All, 3) Has the most characters which is key to diversity, and 4) Can be done in 5 min which outweighs Debates since a) it generates the same education and b) we have other things to do like eat which generates debate’s value since you can’t debate on an empty stomach or if you’re just very sad. It’s the best stasis point since coaches/external commitments/teammates/resources dictates the ability to win or lose debates but the only thing dictating winning Smash is your hand/eye coordination which is net less differential. | 9/8/21 |
2-K- QueerpessTournament: NSD camp | Round: 4 | Opponent: Jet sun | Judge: Cameron McConway Desire from lack projects identity which we can never fully reach which urges the political to determine which identities are legitimate. Thus, the role of the ballot is to vote for the debater with the best method of traversing the fantasy.Edelman 1 (Lee Edelman, No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive, 2004, Duke University Press, p. 7-9) SJDA AND desire, for its translation into a narrative, for its teleological determination. Notions of progress that pass through the aff is rooted in futurism that is built upon the symbol of the child which will always exclude the queer from the political as they are seen as useless to that imageEdelman 2 (Lee Edelman, No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive, 2004, Duke University Press, p. 10-13) SJDA AND of social organization, collective reality, and, inevitably, life itself. anything hindering progress of the metaphorical child is subject to an ontological state of overkillStanley 11 Eric Stanley, Near Life, Queer Death: Overkill and Ontological Capture, 2011 SJVM- Mbembe - "But what does it mean to do violence to what is nothing?" AND of time, out of History, and into that which comes before. The alternative is to embrace the death drive – a full affirmation of queer negativity in which we reject the 1AC in favor of traversing the fantasy and realizing the structural positionality of queer identity.Edelman 3 (Lee Edelman, No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive, 2004, Duke University Press, p. 4-7) SJDA AND committed as they are, on every side, to futurism's unquestioned good. | 9/8/21 |
2-K- SaldanhaTournament: Blue Key | Round: 3 | Opponent: King CP | Judge: Blake Ochoa Their analysis of race focusing on single instances of racism as opposed to a machine of faciality traps race in a dialectic which recreates oppressionSaldanha 1 (Saldanha, Arun. Arun Saldanha Department of Geography, University of Minnesota, Reontologising Race: the Machinic Geography of Phenotype. Vol. 24, Society and Space, 2006. P. 9-12) SJDA AND disgust. Finally, there are seats, compartments, tickets windows the winter The macropolitical striation produced by the faciality machine is the root cause of the rejection of deviance which results in formation of oppression and infinite striation on the subject.Saldanha 2 (Saldanha, Arun. Arun Saldanha Department of Geography, University of Minnesota, Reontologising Race: the Machinic Geography of Phenotype. Vol. 24, Society and Space, 2006. P. 18-20) SJDA AND essentialist concept. Now, what does this nonessentialism mean to antiracist politics? Vote neg to endorse 1000 races- a process in which the subject is unrecognizable from the faciality machineSaldanha 3 (Saldanha, Arun. Arun Saldanha Department of Geography, University of Minnesota, Reontologising Race: the Machinic Geography of Phenotype. Vol. 24, Society and Space, 2006. P. 20-23) SJDA AND hiding around you. find out what is keeping them from becoming actual. | 11/5/21 |
2-K- UndercommonsTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward EB | Judge: Tajaih Robinson | 11/21/21 |
2-K- UniversityTournament: Longhorn Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Little Rock Central MG | Judge: Devin hernandez | 12/4/21 |
2-NC- Kant vs Non TTournament: Blue Key | Round: 3 | Opponent: King CP | Judge: Blake Ochoa The starting point of morality is practical reason. 3 warrants:Ethics must begin a priori:~1~ Uncertainty – our experiences are inaccessible to others which allows people to say they don’t experience the same, however a priori principles are universally applied to all agents.~2~ Bindingness – I can keep asking "why should I follow this" which results in skep since obligations are predicated on ignorantly accepting rules. Only reason solves since asking "why reason?" requires reason which concedes its authority and equally proves agency as constitutiveThat means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.And, reason must be universal – ~A~ a reason for one agent is a reason for another agent. I can’t say 2+24 is true for me but not for you – that’s incoherent.==== any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, counter-methodology: Vote negative to engage in a liberation strategy of universal reason. This entails a starting point where we abstract from individual perspectives to understand the universal, and use this starting point to apply it to empirical institutions and agents.Prefer:Performativity: freedom is the key to the process of justification of arguments through talking freely. Willing that we should abide by their ethical theory presupposes that we own ourselves in the first place. Thus, denying self-ownership in the round automatically implies the truth of the aff framework.Negate:~1~ Independently, Kant is incompatible with a your method – it requires unconditional respect for humanity as an end in itself.Korsgaard 83 bracketed for gendered language (Christine M., "Two Distinctions in Goodness," The Philosophical Review Vol. 92, No. 2 (Apr., 1983), pp. 169-195, JSTOR) AND -and, in general, to make the highest good our end. ~2~ Only univeralizable reason can effectively explain the perspectives of agents – that’s the best method for combatting oppression.Farr 02 Arnold Farr (prof of phil @ UKentucky, focusing on German idealism, philosophy of race, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and liberation philosophy). "Can a Philosophy of Race Afford to Abandon the Kantian Categorical Imperative?" JOURNAL of SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY, Vol. 33 No. 1, Spring 2002, 17–32. AND choosing my maxims I attempt to include the perspective of other moral agents. ~3~ Independently not defending the topic is non-universalizable b/c if nobody defended the topic than a topic wouldn’t have even been created in the first place which is a contradiction in conception. | 11/5/21 |
2-NC- UtilTournament: NSD camp | Round: 1 | Opponent: Mathew Moon | Judge: shrey The standard is maximizing expected well-being, or hedonistic act utilitarianism.1~ Neuroscience- pleasure and pain are intrinsic value and disvalue – everything else regresses.Blum et al. 18 ~Kenneth Blum, 1Department of Psychiatry, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton VA Medical Center, Wright State University, Dayton, OH, USA 2Department of Psychiatry, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA 3Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Keck Medicine University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA 4Division of Applied Clinical Research and Education, Dominion Diagnostics, LLC, North Kingstown, RI, USA 5Department of Precision Medicine, Geneus Health LLC, San Antonio, TX, USA 6Department of Addiction Research and Therapy, Nupathways Inc., Innsbrook, MO, USA 7Department of Clinical Neurology, Path Foundation, New York, NY, USA 8Division of Neuroscience-Based Addiction Therapy, The Shores Treatment and Recovery Center, Port Saint Lucie, FL, USA 9Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary 10Division of Addiction Research, Dominion Diagnostics, LLC. North Kingston, RI, USA 11Victory Nutrition International, Lederach, PA., USA 12National Human Genome Center at Howard University, Washington, DC., USA, Marjorie Gondré-Lewis, 12National Human Genome Center at Howard University, Washington, DC., USA 13Departments of Anatomy and Psychiatry, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC US, Bruce Steinberg, 4Division of Applied Clinical Research and Education, Dominion Diagnostics, LLC, North Kingstown, RI, USA, Igor Elman, 15Department Psychiatry, Cooper University School of Medicine, Camden, NJ, USA, David Baron, 3Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Keck Medicine University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA, Edward J Modestino, 14Department of Psychology, Curry College, Milton, MA, USA, Rajendra D Badgaiyan, 15Department Psychiatry, Cooper University School of Medicine, Camden, NJ, USA, Mark S Gold 16Department of Psychiatry, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA, "Our evolved unique pleasure circuit makes humans different from apes: Reconsideration of data derived from animal studies", U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 28 February 2018, accessed: 19 August 2020, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6446569/~~ R.S. AND . Deleuze’s theory of individual desire can’t spill up to influencing macropolitical structures. Impact calc – extinction outweighsA~ Reversibility- it forecloses the alternative because we can’t improve society if we are all deadD~ Uncertainty- if we’re unsure about which interpretation of the world is true, we should preserve the world to keep debating about it, evaluate the debate after the 1nc on reciprocity since we both have one speech4~ TJF’s Most articles about strikes are written through util – means other frameworks can never engage with core questions of the lit and decks predictability.2) util is the baseline introduction to debate and the most accessible, other fw’s require coaches to learn which are expensive B. TJFs first – substance begs the question of a framework being good for debate – fairness is a gateway issue to deciding the better debater and education is the reason schools fund debate | 9/8/21 |
2-PIC- Fellow YellowTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 5 | Opponent: West Des Moines Valley MM | Judge: Breigh Plat | 11/20/21 |
2-ROTB- Truth TestingTournament: Longhorn Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Little Rock Central MG | Judge: Devin hernandez | 12/4/21 |
NOVDEC-CP- International court of justiceTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 4 | Opponent: Lexington JB | Judge: Phoenix Pittman | 11/20/21 |
NOVDEC-DA- Business confidenceTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 2 | Opponent: Harker SY | Judge: Lukas Krause | 11/20/21 |
NOVDEC-DA- Tech innovationTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 7 | Opponent: Millburn ST | Judge: Phoenix Pittman | 11/21/21 |
NOVDEC-K- QueerpessimismTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 4 | Opponent: Durham SA | Judge: Silma Bathily | 11/21/21 |
NOVDEC-NC- KorsgaardTournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 2 | Opponent: Harker SY | Judge: Lukas Krause | 11/20/21 |
NOVDEC-NC- LogconTournament: Blue Key | Round: 2 | Opponent: Basis Silicon Valley SK | Judge: Arjan Kang Permissibility and presumption negate – a. the resolution indicates the affirmative is proactive, and permissibility would deny the existence of an obligation b. Statements are more often false than true because any part can be false. This means you negate if there is no offense because the resolution is probably false.The neg burden is to prove that the aff won’t logically happen in the status quo, and the aff burden is to prove that it will.Top of Form Prefer:1~ Text –A~ Ought is "used to express logical consequence" as defined by Merriam-Webster(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ought) Massa B~ Oxford Dictionary defines ought as "used to indicate something that is probable."https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ought Massa 2~ Debatability – a) it focuses debates on empirics about squo trends rather than irresolvable abstract principles that’ve been argued for years B~ moral framework debate is impossible.Joyce 02 Joyce, Richard. Myth of Morality. Port Chester, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2002. p 45-47. AND count as evidence that would sway the debate one way or the other. The resolution is incoherent-1~ Merrian websters defines to ashttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/to AND or condition suggestive of movement toward a place, person, or thing reached But just governments can’t move to an obligations so rez is incoherent2~ Merrian Websters defines right ashttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/right But there is no base for strikes to be perpendicular to, so the rez does nothing3~ Merrian websters defines Strike as to delete something 4~ Merrian Websters defines workers asany of the sexually underdeveloped and usually sterile members of a colony of social ants, bees, wasps, or termites that perform most of the labor and protective duties of the colony 3~ Zeno’s Paradox – to go anywhere, you must go halfway first, and then you must go half of the remaining distance, and half of the remaining distance, and so forth to infinity – thus, motion is impossible because it necessitates traversing an infinite number of spaces in a finite amount of time. If movement is impossible, banning LAWs isn’t a logical consequence of the rez.Additionally, in order to say I want to fix x problem, you must say that you want x problem to exist, since it requires the problem exist to solve, which makes any moral attempt inherently immoral. Also, either it’s the case we can predict the outcome of a situation, or we cannot. We cannot, insofar as no situation is ever replicated exactly, and even if it can, there’s no guarantee the outcome will be the same. If we can predict situations, that means everyone can, which means we will always predict each other, making a paradox of action insofar as we always attempt to predict the outcomes of each other’s actions, and will cancel out the obligations. | 11/5/21 |
NOVDEC-T- Must spec strikesTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 4 | Opponent: Lexington JB | Judge: Phoenix Pittman | 11/20/21 |
NOVDEC-T-Must not specify governmentsTournament: Apple Valley | Round: 2 | Opponent: Harker AS | Judge: Gordon Krauss | 11/20/21 |
NSD-DA- Political capitalTournament: NSD camp | Round: 4 | Opponent: Jet sun | Judge: Cameron McConway Biden has PC for infrastructure but it needs to maintained in the face of impatient democrats.Sullivan and Kane 6/11 ~Sean and Paul. Sean Sullivan covers national politics, with a focus on the 2020 presidential campaign. Paul Kane. Washington, D.C. Senior congressional correspondent and columnist. Education: University of Delaware, BA. "‘Time is running out’: Democrats split over Biden’s relentless focus on infrastructure". 6-9-2021. . https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democrats-split-biden-infrastructure/2021/06/10/f1f95a8e-c91f-11eb-afd0-9726f7ec0ba6'story.html.~~ SJVM AND doesn’t mean you win the fight," said the Rev. Al Sharpton. Preserving comfortable union relations maintains PC.Kerrissey and Schofer 13 ~Kerrissey, Jasmine, and Evan Schofer. Jasmine Kerrissey Department of Sociology University of California, Irvine Evan Schofer Department of Sociology University of California, Irvine. "Union Membership and Political Participation in the United States." Social Forces, vol. 91, no. 3, 2013, pp. 895–928. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23361125~ SJVM AND collective action with employers and to maintain political capital with the Democratic party. Strike would divide the UnionIsraelstam 17 ~Ivan. Ivan Israelstam is the Chief Executive of Labour Law Management Consulting. "What is the impact of strikes for employers and employees?". 11-22-2017. Skills Portal. https://www.skillsportal.co.za/content/what-impact-strikes-employers-and-employees.~~ SJVM AND able to help the parties rebuild their relationship once the strike is over. Infrastructure bill is necessary to tackle emission reduction goals.Newburger 3/29 ~Emma. Emma Newburger is a Climate policy reporter at @CNBC. @Cornell grad. "Here’s how Biden’s infrastructure package will likely tackle climate change". 1-27-2021. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/29/biden-infrastructure-bill-what-to-expect-on-climate-change.html.~~ SJVM AND Jenkins added. "We are confident that Congress can achieve these goals." ExtinctionSpecktor 19 ~Brandon writes about the science of everyday life for Live Science, and previously for Reader's Digest magazine, where he served as an editor for five years~ 6-4-2019, "Human Civilization Will Crumble by 2050 If We Don't Stop Climate Change Now, New Paper Claims," livescience, https://www.livescience.com/65633-climate-change-dooms-humans-by-2050.html Justin AND and perhaps "the end of human global civilization as we know it." | 9/8/21 |
NSD-DA- tech innovationTournament: NSD camp | Round: 1 | Opponent: Mathew Moon | Judge: shrey Violent strike efforts are increasing – they slow innovation, specifically in the tech sector.Hanasoge 16 ~Chaithra; Senior Research Analyst, Market Researcher, Consumer Insights, Strategy Consulting; "The Union Strikes: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly," Supply Wisdom; April/June 2016 (Doesn’t specifically say but this is the most recent event is cites); https://www.supplywisdom.com/resources/the-union-strikes-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/~~ Justin AND in a city like Kolkata, which carries a strong trade union culture. Victories like the aff mobilizes unions in the IT sector.Vynck et al 21 ~Gerrit De; Carleton University, BA in Journalism and Global Politics, tech reporter for The Washington Post. He writes about Google and the algorithms that increasingly shape society. He previously covered tech for seven years at Bloomberg News; Nitashu Tiku; Columbia University, BA in English, New York University, MA in Journalism, Washington Post's tech culture reporter based in San Francisco; Macalester College, BA in English, Columbia University, MS in Journalism, reporter for The Washington Post who is focused on technology coverage in the Pacific Northwest; "Six things to know about the latest efforts to bring unions to Big Tech," The Washington Post; https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/26/tech-unions-explainer/~~ Justin AND as the PRO Act, to recognize gig worker collectives as real unions. Technological innovation solves every existential threat – which outweighs.Matthews 18 Dylan. Co-founder of Vox, citing Nick Beckstead @ Rutgers University. 10-26-2018. "How to help people millions of years from now." Vox. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2018/10/26/18023366/far-future-effective-altruism-existential-risk-doing-good AND far future, then effective altruism just becomes plain ol’ do-goodery. | 9/8/21 |
NSD-NC- Logical consequencesTournament: NSD camp | Round: 1 | Opponent: Mathew Moon | Judge: shrey Permissibility and presumption negate – a. the resolution indicates the affirmative has to prove an obligation, and permissibility would deny the existence of an obligation b. Statements are more often false than true because any part can be false so negate because the aff is probably falseThe aff burden is to prove that the resolutional statement is logical, and the reciprocal neg burden is to prove that the resolutional statement is illogical.Prefer:1. Text – Oxford Dictionary defines ought as "used to indicate something that is probable."https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ought Massa Ought is "used to express logical consequence" as defined by Merriam-Webster(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ought) Massa 2. Debatability – a) my interp means debates focus on empirics about squo trends rather than irresolvable abstract principles that’ve been argued for years b) Moral oughts cannot guide action.Gray, Grey, JW. "The Is/Ought Gap: How Do We Get "Ought" from "Is?"" Ethical Realism. N.p., 19 July 2011. Web. 28 Oct. 2015. Massa AND arsenic. If it is, we have some more explaining to do. 4. Neg definition choice – The aff should have defined ought in the 1ac as their value, by not doing so they have forfeited their right to read a new definition – kills 1NC strategy since I premised my engagement on a lack of your definition.~1~ Inherency – either a) the aff is non-inherent and you vote neg on presumption or b) it is and it isn’t logically going to happen.~2~ In order to say I want to fix x problem, you must say that you want x problem to exist, since it requires the problem exist to solve, which makes any moral attempt inherently immoral.~3~ To go anywhere, you must go halfway first, and then you must go half of the remaining distance ad infinitum – thus, motion is impossible because it necessitates traversing an infinite number of spaces in finite time. | 9/8/21 |
NSD-T- Must not spec just governmentTournament: NSD camp | Round: 4 | Opponent: Jet sun | Judge: Cameron McConway Interpretation: The affirmative may not specify a just government that recognizes workers’ unconditional right to strike ."A" is an indefinite article that modifies "just government" in the res – means that you have to prove the resolution true in a VACCUM, not in a particular instanceCCC ("Articles, Determiners, and Quantifiers", http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/determiners/determiners.htm~~#articles, Capital Community College Foundation, a nonprofit 501 c-3 organization that supports scholarships, faculty development, and curriculum innovation) LHSLA JC/SJ AND the former (see beagle sentence) refers to all members of that class Violation: they spec ~x~Standards:~1~ precision – the counter-interp justifies them arbitrarily doing away with random words in the resolution which decks negative ground and preparation because the aff is no longer bounded by the resolution. Independent voter for jurisdiction – the judge doesn’t have the jurisdiction to vote aff if there wasn’t a legitimate aff.~2~ limits – the UN says there are 195 recognized governments in the world but even that’s not an agreed upon brightline because there are just governments that are not yet countries – explodes limits since there are tons of independent affs plus functionally infinite combinations, all with different advantages in different political situations incentivinsing more cheaty pics due to lack of ground. Kills neg prep and debatability since there are no DAs that apply to every aff – i.e. the need for a right to strike is different in the US than China– means the aff is always more prepared and wins just for speccing.~3~ tva – just read your aff as an advantage under a whole res aff, solves all ur offense | 9/8/21 |
NSD-theory- spec strikeTournament: NSD camp | Round: 1 | Opponent: Mathew Moon | Judge: shrey Interpretation: The affirmative must specify the type of strike that a just government ought to recognize as a right.Violation: You don’t.Types and purpose of strikes are the core question of the topic and there’s no consensus on normal means.NLRB ~National Labor Relations Board. "The Right to Strike". The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is comprised of a team of professionals who work to assure fair labor practices and workplace democracy nationwide. US Gov. https://www.nlrb.gov/strikes.~~ SJVM AND notice in writing to the institution and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. Standards:1~ Stable advocacy – 1AR clarification delinks neg positions that prove why a certain type of strike is bad since it’s not the same degree to which the Aff forces governments to recognize – wrecks neg ballot access and kills in depth engagement – CX doesn’t check a~ asking questions about the advocacy decks neg questions about the case b~ Judges don’t flow and debaters are trained to be shifty.2~ Prep skew – I don’t know what they will be willing to clarify until CX which means I could go 6 minutes planning to read a disad to a lawful strike under the Aff and then get screwed over in CX when they say that’s not permitted under their advocacy. The time in between is when I should be formulating my strat and waiting until cx is the abuse. | 9/8/21 |
SEPTOCT-CP- ExportsTournament: Yale | Round: 6 | Opponent: Unionville MG | Judge: Annie Wang CP text: The US ought to—-Ramp up funding for COVAX—-Engage in an "all-out mobilization" strategy that would lead a multilateral effort consisting of allies in the G-7 and NATO for assistance in the flow of vaccine supplies—-Increase focus on domestic production of vaccines including companies, nonprofits, and organizations in vaccination programs to increase and export vaccines.—-Engage in a voluntary licensing strategy and help set up local hubs for manufacturing capacitySolves vaccine diplomacy and covid.Gayle et al 21 ~Helene, Gordon LaForge, and Annie-Marie Slaughter; 3/19/21; President and CEO of the Chicago Community Trust and has served in global health and development roles with CARE, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; President and CEO of the Chicago Community Trust and has served in global health and development roles with CARE, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Senior Researcher at Princeton University and a lecturer at Arizona State University’s Thunderbird School of Global Management; CEO of New America and former Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. State Department; "America Can—and Should—Vaccinate the World," Foreign Affairs, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2021-03-19/america-can-and-should-vaccinate-world~~ Justin AND and trusted partner for peace, progress, and security" for everyone. | 9/22/21 |
SEPTOCT-CP- LoansTournament: Loyola | Round: 1 | Opponent: harvard westlake AW | Judge: Ishan rereddy CP text: The member nations of the WTO should:—-Loan an additional 4 billion dollars of additional funding to close the pre-purchase gap of 350 million vaccines to achieve world-wide immunity—-The World Bank should relax the conditions to receive a loan as per Goldberg 21—-Eliminate export restriction on critical medicines during pandemics.The CP solves pandemics better – the aff misidentifies the problem.Goldberg 20 ~PINELOPI KOUJIANOU; Former World Bank Group chief economist and editor-in-chief of the American Economic Review, Professor of Economics at Yale University; "Forget the Vaccine Patent Waiver," Project Syndicate; 5/13/21; https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/wto-vaccine-waiver-is-beside-the-point-by-pinelopi-koujianou-goldberg-2021-05~~ Justin AND funneling surpluses from high-income countries to the rest of the world. | 9/4/21 |
SEPTOCT-CP-ScientistTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 1 | Opponent: Princeton DR | Judge: Spencer Orlowski Text: A nation appointed international panel of scientists including National Academies and corresponding organizations should ~reduce intellectual property protections during pandemics~ and manage similar conflicts of interest between intellectual property.International panel of science diplomats can rule over IP—-that’s key to science diplomacy.Hajjar and Greenbaum 18 ~David; Dean Emeritus and University Distinguished Professor, and Professor of Biochemistry and Pathology at Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, a Jefferson Science Fellow of the National Academies at the U.S. Department of State, and a recent Senior Fellow in Science Policy at the Brookings Institute; Steven; Professor and Chair of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Hunter College of the City University of New York and a Fellow of the American Physical Society. He was a Jefferson Science Fellow of the National Academies at the U.S. Department of State; "Leveraging Diplomacy for Managing Scientific Challenges," American Diplomacy; September 18; https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2018/09/leveraging-diplomacy-for-managing-scientific-challenges-an-opportunity-to-navigate-the-future-of-science/~~ Justin AND or funding agency panelists for the advancement of science toward the greater good. Solves every existential threat.Haynes 18—research associate in the Neurobiology Department at Harvard Medical School (Trevor, "Science Diplomacy: Collaboration in a rapidly changing world," http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/science-diplomacy-collaboration-rapidly-changing-world/, dml) Re-Cut Justin AND can to foster collaboration. The future of human civilization depends on it. Pics are good 1). negflex, negating is harder they get to speak first and last so theyre always ahead on judge psychology and theres a 7-6 timeskew in rebuttal speeches, the neg needs some way to compensate, 2) critical thinking making the 1ar harder forces them to think on their feet which controls the strongest internal link to fairness insofar as it forces big schoolers of their docs C) topic lit- allows us to delve into | 9/25/21 |
SEPTOCT-CP-Scientist v2Tournament: Heart of texas | Round: 2 | Opponent: Tays KM | Judge: Sam Larson They have the jurisdiction to rule over intellectual property and secure science diplomacy.Hajjar and Greenbaum 18 ~David; Dean Emeritus and University Distinguished Professor, and Professor of Biochemistry and Pathology at Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, a Jefferson Science Fellow of the National Academies at the U.S. Department of State, and a recent Senior Fellow in Science Policy at the Brookings Institute; Steven; Professor and Chair of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Hunter College of the City University of New York and a Fellow of the American Physical Society. He was a Jefferson Science Fellow of the National Academies at the U.S. Department of State; "Leveraging Diplomacy for Managing Scientific Challenges," American Diplomacy; September 18; https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2018/09/leveraging-diplomacy-for-managing-scientific-challenges-an-opportunity-to-navigate-the-future-of-science/~~ Justin AND or funding agency panelists for the advancement of science toward the greater good. ~ ~ Enforcement through scientists is effective and solves WTO legitimacy.Turekian et al 18 ~Vaughan, Peter, Teruo, Robert; 1/16/18; "Science Diplomacy: A Pragmatic Perspective from the Inside," Science and Diplomacy, https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/article/2018/pragmatic-perspective~~ Justin AND biologics. Scientific input into such negotiations is critical to protect national positions. Solves every existential threat.Haynes 18—research associate in the Neurobiology Department at Harvard Medical School (Trevor, "Science Diplomacy: Collaboration in a rapidly changing world," http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/science-diplomacy-collaboration-rapidly-changing-world/, dml) Re-Cut Justin AND can to foster collaboration. The future of human civilization depends on it. | 10/19/21 |
SEPTOCT-DA- CollaborationTournament: Loyola | Round: 1 | Opponent: harvard westlake AW | Judge: Ishan rereddy Collaboration between companies high now and key to solving covid – the aff destroys it.Zilber 21 ~Einav; Owner of Zilber IP; "The proposed TRIPs covid waiver is a bad idea that could do a lot of good," IAM-Media; 6/23/21; https://www.iam-media.com/law-policy/the-proposed-trips-covid-waiver-bad-idea-could-do-lot-of-good~~ Justin + Diego AND Could it have the practical effect of legalising otherwise unlawful access to technology? Key to long term innovation.Albrectsen 17 ~Anne-Birgitte; Chief Executive Officer, Plan International; "Why collaboration will be key to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals," World Economic Forum; 1/31/17; https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/realising-the-potential-of-cross-sector-partnerships/~~ Justin+Diego AND huge, but the task is one that we cannot afford to duck. Innovation solves extinction – avoids tipping points.Naam 13 ~Ramez; Fellow of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies; "How Innovation Could Save the Planet" Awaken.com; March-April 2013; https://awaken.com/2013/02/how-innovation-could-save-the-planet/~~ Re-Cut Justin AND the future and (B) will probably be quite lucrative for them. | 9/4/21 |
SEPTOCT-DA- Debt CeilingTournament: Heart of texas | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Lexington AK | Judge: Aaron Timmons, Barquin, Faizaan Dossani A Temporary debt ceiling bill has passed but its not enough, comprehensive White House-Congress cooperation must be achieved through political capital for a December voteCornwell 10-13 Susan Cornwell, 10-13-2021, "U.S. House votes for short-term debt ceiling fix, averting default," Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-house-expected-pass-bill-hike-debt-ceiling-avert-default-2021-10-12/ SJDA AND Trump priorities like construction of a southwest border wall to keep out immigrants. Aff doesn’t solve but requires negotiations that saps PC.Pooley 21 ~James; Former deputy director general of the United Nations’ World Intellectual Property Organization and a member of the Center for Intellectual Property Understanding; "Drawn-Out Negotiations Over Covid IP Will Blow Back on Biden," Barron’s; 5/26/21; https://www.barrons.com/articles/drawn-out-negotiations-over-covid-ip-will-blow-back-on-biden-51621973675~~ Justin AND helping export our surplus vaccine doses and vaccine ingredients to countries in need. Debt default tips gradual dollar decline into a spiral of destabilizing hot money outflows.Brian Chappatta 20, CFA Charterholder, Bloomberg Opinion Columnist Covering Debt Markets, BS in Journalism and Economics from Northwestern University, "A Weakening U.S. Dollar Is Still the Preeminent Currency", Bloomberg Quint, 10/22/2020, https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/a-weakening-u-s-dollar-is-still-the-preeminent-currency AND pool of money will take the other side of the dollar doomsday narrative. Extinction.Joshua Zoffer 20, Investor at Cove Hill Partners, Fellow at New America, JD Candidate at Yale University Law School, AB from Harvard University, "To End Forever War, Keep the Dollar Globally Dominant", The New Republic, 2/3/2020, https://newrepublic.com/article/156417/end-forever-war-keep-dollar-globally-dominant AND consortium of countries is prepared to fund, such as climate change mitigation. | 10/21/21 |
SEPTOCT-DA- Dollar HegemonyTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 1 | Opponent: Princeton DR | Judge: Spencer Orlowski Dollar heg is increasing but is unstableKondo 21 Masaki Kondo, emerging writer/curator | PhD candidate in Cinema and Media Studies ,2-5-2021, ","Bloomberg, https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/dollar-morphs-into-risk-on-currency-as-u-s-growth-hopes-rebound SJDA AND stimulus, slowing coronavirus infections and vaccine distribution is "a perfect storm." IPR’s are key to dollar heg and national profits, the aff destroys thatSchwartz 19 Herman Mark Schwartz, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, (2019) American hegemony: intellectual property rights, dollar centrality, and infrastructural power , Review of International Political Economy, 26:3, 496-497, DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2019.1597754 SJDA AND thus are imbued with the sensibility of the Anglo-dominated financial community. Medical IPR is uniquely key, creates a slippery slope to other sectors and is needed for US market share
AND over international trade to block this danger to domestic high-technology industries. ImpactsImpact – Nuke WarDollar Heg solves conflict, international instability, and a laundry list of existential impactsZoffer 20 Joshua Zoffer 2-3-2020 "To End Forever War, Keep the Dollar Globally Dominant" https://newrepublic.com/article/156417/end-forever-war-keep-dollar-globally-dominant (Investor at Cove Hill Partners, Fellow at New America, JD Candidate at Yale University Law School, AB from Harvard University)Elmer AND or consortium of countries is prepared to fund, such as climate change mitigation | 9/25/21 |
SEPTOCT-DA- FisheriesTournament: Heart of texas | Round: 5 | Opponent: Harvard-Westlake JH | Judge: Albert Cardenas WTO consensus on fishing subsidies likely now but requires negotiations- consensus is key to solving overfishing- the brink is now.Koop 21 ~Fermin; Argentine journalist specializing in the environment with experience across diverse publications; "WTO Inches Towards a Deal to End Harmful Fishing Subsidies," Maritime-Executive; 7/30/21; https://www.maritime-executive.com/editorials/wto-inches-towards-a-deal-to-end-harmful-fishing-subsidies~~ Justin AND ,?UN special envoy for the ocean, said in a recent webinar. Negotiations on IPR require tradeoffs- empirics prove.DC = DEVELOPING COUNTRY AND Acts Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations’.11 That collapses biodiversity.Osmanski 20 ~Stephanie; Freelance Journaler, Writer at GreenMatters; "How Does Overfishing Affect Biodiversity? Let's Do a Deep Dive," GreenMatters; 12/29/20; https://www.greenmatters.com/p/how-overfishing-affects-biodiversity~~ Justin AND . TBH, might be best to go fish-free. instead. Biodiversity loss causes extinction.Torres 19 ~Phil; Affiliate Scholar at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, Founder of the X-Risks Institute, Writer Appearing in Skeptic, Free Inquiry, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Salon, Truthout, Erkenntnis, Metaphilosophy; "Biodiversity Loss: An Existential Risk Comparable To Climate Change," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists; 4/11/16; https://thebulletin.org/2016/04/biodiversity-loss-an-existential-risk-comparable-to-climate-change/~~ Justin AND as one of the most significant contemporary risks to human prosperity and survival. | 10/17/21 |
SEPTOCT-DA- InfrastructureTournament: Grapevine | Round: 3 | Opponent: St agnes EH | Judge: Samantha Mcloughlin Infrastructure is passing now and is at the top of Bidens agenda—-Biden has enough PC but continuation is critical.Nomikos 9/1 ~William; 9/1/21; Assistant professor of political science at Washington University in St. Louis and director of the Data-driven Analysis of Peace Project; "Everyone has an opinion on Afghanistan — Do voters care?" The Hill, https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/570422-everyone-has-an-opinion-on-afghanistan-do-voters-care~~ Justin AND the best chance for retaining control of Congress in the 2022 midterm elections. Aff doesn’t solve but requires negotiations that saps PC.Pooley 21 ~James; Former deputy director general of the United Nations’ World Intellectual Property Organization and a member of the Center for Intellectual Property Understanding; "Drawn-Out Negotiations Over Covid IP Will Blow Back on Biden," Barron’s; 5/26/21; https://www.barrons.com/articles/drawn-out-negotiations-over-covid-ip-will-blow-back-on-biden-51621973675~~ Justin AND helping export our surplus vaccine doses and vaccine ingredients to countries in need. That solves existential climate change.Castillo 21 ~Rhyma; 8/16/21; News and politics writer at Elite Daily, where she's passionate about advocating for underserved communities throughout the United States. She’s covered issues in politics, immigration, environmental racism, climate change, gun violence, and more. After graduating with an English degree from Texas AandM Unversity, Rhyma has worked as a technical writer and test author at Educational Testing Service (ETS), a copywriter for Mightier Content, and as a Creative Operations Specialist at GoDaddy. She also has bylines as a freelancer at the San Antonio Current, where her reporting on local news, politics, tech, and entertainment has been widely circulated; "Experts Explain What You Can Do About Climate Change After That Scary IPCC Report," Elite Daily, https://www.elitedaily.com/news/what-you-can-do-climate-change-after-ipcc-report~~ Justin AND , ~and~ those investments take a while to come to fruition." | 9/11/21 |
SEPTOCT-DA- Infrastructure v2Tournament: Yale | Round: 6 | Opponent: Unionville MG | Judge: Annie Wang Bipartisan infrastructure bill passing now but PC is needed – there is no margin for error.Kapur et al 9/8 ~Sahil, Frank Thorp, and Leigh Ann Caldwell; 9/8/21; Sahil Kapur is a national political reporter for NBC News, Frank Thorp V is a producer and off-air reporter covering Congress for NBC News, managing coverage of the Senate, Leigh Ann Caldwell is an NBC News correspondent; "Democrats plow 'full speed ahead' on sweeping Biden budget, despite tensions," https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/democrats-plow-full-speed-ahead-sweeping-biden-budget-despite-tensions-n1278722~~ Justin AND them could basically make a few cosmetic changes and throw in the towel." Aff doesn’t solve but requires negotiations that saps PC.Pooley 21 ~James; Former deputy director general of the United Nations’ World Intellectual Property Organization and a member of the Center for Intellectual Property Understanding; "Drawn-Out Negotiations Over Covid IP Will Blow Back on Biden," Barron’s; 5/26/21; https://www.barrons.com/articles/drawn-out-negotiations-over-covid-ip-will-blow-back-on-biden-51621973675~~ Justin AND helping export our surplus vaccine doses and vaccine ingredients to countries in need. Infrastructure secures the grid against worsening and increasing cyberattacks.Carney 21 ~Chris; 8/6/21; Senior policy advisor at Nossaman LLC, former US Representative, former professor of political science at Penn State University; "The US Senate Infrastructure Bill: Securing Our Electrical Grid Through P3s and Grants," JDSupra, https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-us-senate-infrastructure-bill-4989100/~~ Justin AND partnerships and grants, the nation can quickly secure its infrastructure from cyberattacks. Cyberattacks on the grid spiral to all-out nuclear conflict.Klare 19 ~Michael; November 2019; Professor emeritus of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College; "Cyber Battles, Nuclear Outcomes? Dangerous New Pathways to Escalation," Arms Control Association, https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2019-11/features/cyber-battles-nuclear-outcomes-dangerous-new-pathways-escalation~~ Justin AND such attacks "could lead to major conflict and possibly nuclear war."14 | 9/22/21 |
SEPTOCT-NC- KorsgaardTournament: Loyola | Round: 1 | Opponent: harvard westlake AW | Judge: Ishan rereddy Permissibility and presumption negate – ~a~ the resolution indicates the aff has to prove an obligation, and permissibility would deny the existence of an obligation ~b~ Statements are more often false than true because any part can be false. This means you negate if there is no offense because the resolution is probably false.Ethics must begin a priori:~1~ Uncertainty – our experiences are inaccessible to others which allows people to say they don’t experience the same, however a priori principles are universally applied to all agents.~2~ Bindingness – I can keep asking "why should I follow this" which results in skep since obligations are predicated on ignorantly accepting rules. Only reason solves since asking "why reason?" requires reason which concedes its authority and equally proves agency as constitutiveThat means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard: ~a~ freedom is the key to the process of justification of arguments. Willing that we should abide by their ethical theory presupposes that we own ourselves in the first place. Thus, it is logically incoherent to justify the neg arguments/standard without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others ~b~ Frameworks are topicality interps of the word ought so they should be theoretically justified. Prefer on resource disparities—a focus on evidence and statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs who lack huge evidence files. A debate under my framework can easily be won without any prep since huge evidence files aren’t required.1~ Intellectual property is an inalienable personal right of economic usePozzo 6 Pozzo, Riccardo. "Immanuel Kant on Intellectual Property." Trans/Form/Ação, vol. 29, no. 2, 2006, pp. 11–18., doi:10.1590/s0101-31732006000200002. SJDA recut SJKS recut Cookie JX AND he was to make, as we say today, a free use. 2~The aff violates the categorical imperative and is non-universalizable- governments have a binding obligation to protect creationsVan Dyke 18 Raymond Van Dyke, 7-17-2018, "The Categorical Imperative for Innovation and Patenting," IPWatchdog, https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/07/17/categorical-imperative-innovation-patenting/id=99178/ SJDA recut SJKS AND trade secret protection would become the mainstay for society with the heightened distrust. IPs are a necessary check on companies free-riding off associations of quality. that treats people as ¬means to an end and takes advantage of their efforts which violates the principle of humanityWong et al 20 ~Liana, Ian, and Shayerah; Analyst in International Trade and Finance; Specialist in International Trade and Finance; Specialist in International Trade and Finance; "Intellectual Property Rights and International Trade," *Updated* 5/12/20; CRS; https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20200512'RL34292'2023354cc06b0a4425a2c5e02c0b13024426d206.pdf~~ Justin AND by registration with the PTO, through a process similar to trademark registration. | 9/4/21 |
SEPTOCT-NC- Korsgaard v2Tournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 1 | Opponent: Princeton DR | Judge: Spencer Orlowski Permissibility and presumption negate – ~a~ the resolution indicates the aff has to prove an obligation, and permissibility would deny the existence of an obligation ~b~ Statements are more often false than true because any part can be false. This means you negate if there is no offense because the resolution is probably false.Ethics must begin a priori:~1~ Uncertainty – our experiences are inaccessible to others which allows people to say they don’t experience the same, however a priori principles are universally applied to all agents.~2~ Bindingness – I can keep asking "why should I follow this" which results in skep since obligations are predicated on ignorantly accepting rules. Only reason solves since asking "why reason?" requires reason which concedes its authority and equally proves agency as constitutiveThat means we must universally will maxims— any non-universalizable norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends.Thus, the standard is consistency with the categorical imperative.Prefer the standard: ~a~ freedom is the key to the process of justification of arguments. Willing abide by their ethical theory presupposes that we own ourselves. So its logically incoherent to justify their arguments without first willing that we can pursue ends free from others ~b~ Frameworks are topicality interps of the word ought so they should be theoretically justified. Prefer on resource disparities—a focus on statistics privileges debaters with the most preround prep which excludes lone-wolfs. A debate under my framework solves since huge files aren’t reuqired1~The aff violates the categorical imperative and is non-universalizable- governments have a binding obligation to protect creationsVan Dyke 18 Raymond Van Dyke, 7-17-2018, "The Categorical Imperative for Innovation and Patenting," IPWatchdog, https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/07/17/categorical-imperative-innovation-patenting/id=99178/ SJDA recut SJKS AND trade secret protection would become the mainstay for society with the heightened distrust. ~2~ IPs are a necessary check on companies free-riding off associations of quality which violates the principle of humnityWong et al 20 ~Liana, Ian, and Shayerah; Analyst in International Trade and Finance; Specialist in International Trade and Finance; Specialist in International Trade and Finance; "Intellectual Property Rights and International Trade," *Updated* 5/12/20; CRS; https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20200512'RL34292'2023354cc06b0a4425a2c5e02c0b13024426d206.pdf~~ Justin AND by registration with the PTO, through a process similar to trademark registration. | 9/25/21 |
SEPTOCT-NC- LogconTournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Mcneil SC | Judge: Truman Le The neg burden is to prove that the aff won’t logically happen in the status quo, and the aff burden is to prove that it will.Prefer:1~ Text –A~ Ought is "used to express logical consequence" as defined by Merriam-Webster(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ought) Massa B~ Oxford Dictionary defines ought as "used to indicate something that is probable."https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ought Massa 2~ Debatability – A~ it focuses debates on empirics about squo trends rather than irresolvable abstract principles that’ve been argued for years – resolvability is an independent voter cuz otherwise the judge can’t make a decision which means it’s a constraint on any burden because otherwise the round is impossible B~ moral framework debate is impossible.Joyce 02 Joyce, Richard. Myth of Morality. Port Chester, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2002. p 45-47. AND count as evidence that would sway the debate one way or the other. 3~ Neg definition choice – the aff should have defined ought in the 1ac not doing so they have forfeited their right to read a new definition – kills 1NC strategy since I premised my engagement on a lack of your definition.Now negate:1~ Inherency – either a) the aff is non-inherent and you vote neg on presumption or b) it is and it isn’t going to happen since there are structural barriers that preclude.2~ Motion is impossible – ~a~ To go anywhere, you must go halfway first, and then you must go half of the remaining distance, and half of the remaining distance, and so forth to infinity – thus, motion is impossible because it necessitates traversing an infinite number of spaces in a finite amount of time. | 9/5/21 |
SEPTOCT-NC- Logcon v2Tournament: Loyola | Round: 6 | Opponent: Independant WW | Judge: Dylan Jones Permissibility and presumption negate – a. the resolution indicates the affirmative has to prove an obligation, and permissibility would deny the existence of an obligation b. Statements are more often false than true because any part can be false so negate because the aff is probably falseThe aff burden is to prove that the resolutional statement is logical, and the reciprocal neg burden is to prove that the resolutional statement is illogical.Prefer:1. Text – Oxford Dictionary defines ought as "used to indicate something that is probable."https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ought Massa Ought is "used to express logical consequence" as defined by Merriam-Webster(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ought) Massa 2. Debatability – a) my interp means debates focus on empirics about squo trends rather than irresolvable abstract principles that’ve been argued for years b) Moral oughts cannot guide action.Gray, Grey, JW. "The Is/Ought Gap: How Do We Get "Ought" from "Is?"" Ethical Realism. N.p., 19 July 2011. Web. 28 Oct. 2015. Massa AND arsenic. If it is, we have some more explaining to do. 4. Neg definition choice – The aff should have defined ought in the 1ac as their value, by not doing so they have forfeited their right to read a new definition – kills 1NC strategy since I premised my engagement on a lack of your definition.~1~ Inherency – either a) the aff is non-inherent and you vote neg on presumption or b) it is and it isn’t logically going to happen.~2~ In order to say I want to fix x problem, you must say that you want x problem to exist, since it requires the problem exist to solve, which makes any moral attempt inherently immoral.~3~ member means "a body part or organ" (Marriam Webster) but a nation cannot have bodily organs so the resolutions incoherent~4~ To go anywhere, you must go halfway first, and then you must go half of the remaining distance ad infinitum – thus, motion is impossible because it necessitates traversing an infinite number of spaces in finite time.~5~ Property means "a building" (Oxford Languages) so reducing intellectual buildings is incoherent | 9/7/21 |
SEPTOCT-NC- Util v2Tournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 6 | Opponent: American Heritage Broward SS | Judge: Tajaih Robinson The standard is minimizing death- Our framework is only concerned with saving lives. Calc indicts don’t link—my framework evaluates offense—climate change is bad because as far as we know, is would cause suff. ,ering.~1~ Death outweighs— ~a~ agents can’t act if they fear for their bodily security—my framework constrains every NC and K and ~b~ it’s the worst form of evilPaterson 3 – Department of Philosophy, Providence College, Rhode Island (Craig, "A Life Not Worth Living?", Studies in Christian Ethics. AND the person, the very source and condition of all human possibility.82 2~ Actor spec—governments must use util because they don’t have intentions and are constantly dealing with tradeoffs—outweighs since different agents have different obligations—takes out calc indicts since they are empirically denied.3~ 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 AND against the intending-foreseeing distinction when applied to state action than elsewhere. Util is key to debates about IP.Kar 19 ~Mohit; Writer at the Original Position; "Utilitarianism in the Context of Intellectual Property," The Original Position; 9/18/19; https://originalpositionnluj.wordpress.com/2019/09/18/utilitarianism-in-the-context-of-intellectual-property/~~ Justin AND offset by the prospect of obtaining license fees on their own patents.’ Outweighs –A~ Most articles about IP are written through util – means other frameworks can never engage with core questions of the lit and decks predictability – equal topic lit means fair ground.B~ TJFs first – substance begs the question of a framework being good for debate – fairness is a gateway issue to deciding the winner and education is the reason schools fund debate.2) util is the baseline introduction to debate and the most accessible, other fw’s require coaches to learn which are expensive B. TJFs first – substance begs the question of a framework being good for debate, 2) fw debates are functionally topicality debates of the word ought so they have to be theoretically justifiedImpact calc – extinction outweighsA~ Objectivity- body count is the most objective way to calculate impacts because comparing suffering is unethicalB~ Uncertainty- if we’re unsure about which interpretation of the world is true, we should preserve the world to keep debating about it | 9/27/21 |
SEPTOCT-PIC- Indigenous IPTournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Mcneil SC | Judge: Truman Le CP text: the member nations of the WTO ought to establish an international legal instrument to protect indigenous intellectual propertyWIPO no date WIPO, xx-xx-xxxx, "Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property – Background Brief," No Publication, https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/briefs/tk'ip.html?fbclid=IwAR2iLd8fJ4lNl'fhhwQBHvCdoFEfB44H5GHIWBBb0xGPVBt1fRJT-uzUXDU SJDA AND convene a diplomatic conference for final adoption of one or more international instruments. | 9/5/21 |
SEPTOCT-T- must not spec medicinesTournament: Loyola | Round: 1 | Opponent: harvard westlake AW | Judge: Ishan rereddy Interpretation: "medicines" is a generic bare plural. The aff may not defend that member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for a medicine or subset of medicines.Nebel 19. ~Jake Nebel is an assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Southern California and executive director of Victory Briefs. He writes a lot of this stuff lol – duh.~ "Genericity on the Standardized Tests Resolution." Vbriefly. August 12, 2019. https://www.vbriefly.com/2019/08/12/genericity-on-the-standardized-tests-resolution/?fbclid=IwAR0hUkKdDzHWrNeqEVI7m59pwsnmqLl490n4uRLQTe7bWmWDO'avWCNzi14 TG AND "colleges and universities" is generic rather than existential in the resolution. It applies to "medicines" – 1~ upward entailment test – "member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines" doesn’t entail that member nations of the WTO ought to reduce IPP for drugs because it doesn’t prove that marijuana protections should be reduced 2~ adverb test – adding "always" to the res doesn’t substantially change its meaning because reduce is permanent.Violation: They spec ''''''Standards:~1~ precision – the counter-interp justifies them arbitrarily doing away with random words in the resolution which decks negative ground and preparation because the aff is no longer bounded by the resolution. Independent voter for jurisdiction – the judge doesn’t have the jurisdiction to vote aff if there wasn’t a legitimate aff.~2~ Limits and ground – their model allows affs to defend anything from Covid vaccines to HIV drugs to Insulin— there's no universal DA since each has different functions and political implications — that explodes neg prep and leads to random medicine of the week affs which makes cutting stable neg links impossible — limits key to reciprocal engagement since they create a caselist for neg prep and it takes out ground like DAs to certain medicines which are some of the few neg generics when affs spec medicines.~3~ TVA solves – you could’ve read your plan as an advantage under a whole res advocacy.Fairness – 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 | 9/4/21 |
SEPTOCT-T- must spec IPTournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Mcneil SC | Judge: Truman Le Interpretation: affirmative debaters must delineate what intellectual property they reduce in the 1AC.Four types of IP that are vastly different.Ackerman 17 ~Peter; Founder and CEO, Innovation Asset Group, Inc; "The 4 Main Types of Intellectual Property and Related Costs," Decipher; 1/6/17; https://www.innovation-asset.com/blog/the-4-main-types-of-intellectual-property-and-related-costs~~ Justin AND weigh the competitive significance of your secrets against the cost of protecting them. Violation:Negate:1~ Shiftiness- they can redefine what intellectual properties the 1ac defends in the 1ar which decks strategy and allows them to wriggle out of negative positions which strips the neg of specific IP DAs, IP PICs, and case answers. They will always win on specificity weighing.CX can’t resolve this and is bad because A~ Not flowed B~ Skews 6 min of prep C~ They can lie and no way to check D~ Debaters can be shady.2~ Real World- policy makers will always specify what the object of change is. That outweighs since debate has no value without portable application. It also means zero solvency since the WTO, absent spec, can circumvent aff’s policy since they can say they didn’t know what was affected.This spec shell isn’t regressive- it literally determines what the affirmative implements and who it affects | 9/5/21 |
SEPTOCT-T- reduceTournament: Mid America Cup | Round: 1 | Opponent: Princeton DR | Judge: Spencer Orlowski Interpretation: Precluding a future increase is not a reductionMelinda Harmon 12, Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, 3/6/12, Zieche v. Burlington Res., Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30134, p. lexis AND Zieche has introduced ~*13~ no evidence to convince the Court otherwise. Violation: preventing secondary patents precludes a future increaseStandards:1~ Limits and ground– their model allows affs to defend anything from pandemics to Biden’s presidency— that explodes neg prep and leads to random timeframe of the week affs which makes cutting stable neg links impossible2~ Precision o/w – anything else justifies the aff arbitrarily jettisoning words in the resolution at their whim which decks negative preparation because the aff isn’t bound by the resolution.3~ TVA – defend the advantage to a whole rez timeframe. PICs don’t solve – our model allows you to specify countries and medicines.Fairness – debate is a competitive activity that requires fairness for objective evaluation.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 b~ RVIs incentivize baiting theory and prepping it out which leads to maximally abusive practices c~ Encourages going all in on theory which destroys substantive education | 9/25/21 |
SEPTOCT-T- reduce v2Tournament: Heart of texas | Round: 3 | Opponent: Harker RM | Judge: Eric He Interpretation: Reduce means unconditional and permanent – the aff is a suspension.Reynolds 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, lexis) AND or degrade. The word "reduce" seems adequately to indicate permanency. Violation:Vote neg:1~ Limits and ground– their model allows affs to defend anything from pandemics to Biden’s presidency— there's no universal DA since it’s impossible to know the timeframe when there won’t be IP— that explodes neg prep and leads to random timeframe of the week affs which makes cutting stable neg links impossible — limits key to reciprocal engagement since they create a caselist for neg prep (innovation, collaboration, econ, ptx: all core neg literature thrown away)2~ Precision o/w – anything else justifies the aff arbitrarily jettisoning words in the resolution at their whim which decks negative ground and preparation because the aff is no longer bounded by the resolution.3~ TVA – defend the advantage to a whole rez timeframe. We don’t prevent new FWs, mechanisms, or advantages. PICs don’t solve – our model allows you to specify countries and medicines.Fairness – 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 | 10/17/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
11/20/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/20/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/20/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/5/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/5/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/16/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
1/8/22 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
1/8/22 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/20/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/21/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/21/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/21/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
11/21/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/11/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
10/17/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
10/17/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
10/19/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
10/21/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
12/4/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
12/4/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/4/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/5/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/7/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/25/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/26/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/27/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/27/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/8/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/8/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/27/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/22/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/27/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
| |
9/27/21 | arcoschiang@gmailcom |
|