Walt Whitman Yamamoto Neg
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valley | 1 | Lexington FV | Stephen Scopa |
|
|
| |
| Valley | 3 | Strake Jesuit KS | Ian Matsuzeski |
|
|
| |
| Valley | 5 | Millard North AR | Dylan Jones |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 2 | Strake Jesuit NW | Mariana Colicchio |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 3 | Flintridge Prep TV | Nathaniel Tran |
|
|
| |
| Yale | 5 | Olympia OE | Abhilash Datti |
|
|
| |
| x | Finals | x | x |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| Valley | 1 | Opponent: Lexington FV | Judge: Stephen Scopa AC - Virtue Ethics |
| Valley | 3 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit KS | Judge: Ian Matsuzeski AC - Kant |
| Valley | 5 | Opponent: Millard North AR | Judge: Dylan Jones AC - Opioids |
| Yale | 2 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit NW | Judge: Mariana Colicchio AC Non T Asian Melancholy |
| Yale | 3 | Opponent: Flintridge Prep TV | Judge: Nathaniel Tran AC - Covid |
| Yale | 5 | Opponent: Olympia OE | Judge: Abhilash Datti AC - Access Innovation |
| x | Finals | Opponent: x | Judge: x Contact Info |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
00 - Contact InfoTournament: x | Round: Finals | Opponent: x | Judge: x Please tell me if there are any specific interps you would like me to meet before round (spikes on top, rob spec, etc.) This is terminal defense to your shell. Feel free to message me if there are some docs you can't access - I'll send them to you. I don't have any triggers, but please tell me if you have any before the round so it can be as accessible and comfortable as possible. | 9/12/21 |
SeptOct K - Dean Cap v1Tournament: Yale | Round: 2 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit NW | Judge: Mariana Colicchio Dean KThe aff's embrace of melancholia and fixation on the Asian identity doom their praxis to politics at the margins. Even if they profess to support coalition building, the melancholia inherent to their project makes true change impossible, and they fail to address the root cause of oppression among different oppressed bodies and instead embrace affectual gestures.~Dean, Jodi. "Communist desire."The Ends of History. Routledge, 2013. 14-31.~ WWEY Ontologizing the historical prevents an accurate account of oppression, rendering the aff meaningless and proving only the alt can solve. Wilkie12Wilkie, Assistant Professor of Cultural and Digital Studies – U Wisconsin-La Crosse, '12 The alternative is embracing party politics. This means building a radical coalition that unifies all marginalized by different forms of oppression to challenge capitalism and imperialism. Black Panther Party proves concrete action outside of the state is possible and successful.~Curry Stephenson Malott. "In Defense of Communism Against Critical Pedagogy, Capitalism, and Trump." Critical Education 8, no. 1 (2017).~ WWEY The role of the ballot is consistency with the politics of comradery. This results in a clean break in capitalism that allows us to reimagine political work and transcend capital's limitations on what is possible and feasible. Absent this framing, all movements and coalitions inevitably collapse under the strain of competing interests and the lack of connection.Jodi Dean 19 () "Comrade - An Essay on Political Belonging" Verso, 10-01-2019, http://library.lol/main/429C9EC2E2F0AA8DCC33FE2CC178B11D. Accessed 6-27-2021, WWEY Here in the debate space, an activity uniquely situated in its discussion of social issues and current events, the judge has a unique obligation as an educator to challenge the neoliberalism that pervades pedagogical and policymaking spaces.Ball 17 Stephen J. Ball (Distinguished Service Professor of Sociology of Education at the University College London, Institute of Education. He was elected Fellow of the British Academy in 2006; and is also Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences; and Society of Educational Studies, and a Laureate of Kappa Delta Phi; he has honorary doctorates from the Universities of Turku (Finland), and Leicester. He is co-founder and Managing Editor of the Journal of Education Policy), 2017, "Laboring to Relate: Neoliberalism, Embodied Policy, and Network Dynamics," Peabody Journal of Education, 92:1, 29-41, DOI: 10.1080/0161956X.2016.1264802, this part is pgs. 37-39 Class politics solves and controls root cause – the model minority was constructed because of neoliberal imperialism and class fractures best explain deficiencies with the myth.Jennifer Pan is a contributor to Jacobin, Dissent, the Margins, and other publications. 07.14.2015 https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/07/chua-changelab-nakagawa-model-minority Capitalism is the root cause of the model minority myth – it explains the criteria we use and Why white society views Asians that way.Gans 05 (Herbert J., merican sociologist who has taught at Columbia University between 1971 and 2007, "Race as Class", Contexts 4:4, November 2005, University of Michigan Libraries)AS | 9/18/21 |
SeptOct K - Dean Cap v2Tournament: Yale | Round: 3 | Opponent: Flintridge Prep TV | Judge: Nathaniel Tran The plan's reduction of IP is in line with a broader strategy of vaccine diplomacy – this treats global health as a game of political football to advance imperialist interests in the long-term – only anti-capitalist organizing solves.Patanè, 21 The aff engages in fragmentation through small gestures of resistance that fail to challenge the underlying structure of capitalism, accepting its inevitability. This reproduces melancholia where leftist politics relish marginal change and small legislative victories but fail to engage in true opposition to capitalism, dooming themselves to politics at the margins.~Dean, Jodi. "Communist desire."The Ends of History. Routledge, 2013. 14-31.~ WWEY Capitalism is the root cause of all forms of violence – ~racism, sexism, xenophobia, pandemics, famine, climate change, and nuclear proliferation~ are all direct results of its desire to over commodify – and it is definitionally unable to conceive of its own demise, therefore woefully unequipped to challenge existential threatsJohn Bellamy Foster 19 (John Bellamy Foster is an American professor of sociology at the University of Oregon and editor of the Monthly Review. He writes about political economy of capitalism and economic crisis, ecology and ecological crisis, and Marxist theory. ) "Capitalism Has Failed—What Next?" Monthly Review, 2-1-2019, https://monthlyreview.org/2019/02/01/capitalism-has-failed-what-next/. Accessed 7-9-2021, WWEY The alternative is embracing party politics. This means building a radical coalition that unifies all marginalized by different forms of oppression to challenge capitalism and imperialism. Black Panther Party proves concrete action outside of the state is possible and successful. The conditions are set for a global revolution against capitalism if and only if the neoliberal order does not corrupt the movement – means reject the perm on face due to solvency deficit.This isn't an alternative economic system – that's left for after the revolution and will be shaped through the party by comrades, means generic indicts to communism don't apply as that's not the alt and just another instance of capitalism attempting to bracket, make intelligible, and exploit worker's projects through its individualist and radically cynical and commodified perception of reality.~Curry Stephenson Malott. "In Defense of Communism Against Critical Pedagogy, Capitalism, and Trump." Critical Education 8, no. 1 (2017).~ WWEY The role of the ballot is consistency with the politics of comradery. This allows us to engage in further reaching forms of political action by expanding our horizons of what is possible and unifying all in a collective struggle.Jodi Dean 19 () "Comrade - An Essay on Political Belonging" Verso, 10-01-2019, http://library.lol/main/429C9EC2E2F0AA8DCC33FE2CC178B11D. Accessed 6-27-2021, WWEY Neoliberalism infects policy education – you should prioritize epistemologically challenging itBall 17 Stephen J. Ball (Distinguished Service Professor of Sociology of Education at the University College London, Institute of Education. He was elected Fellow of the British Academy in 2006; and is also Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences; and Society of Educational Studies, and a Laureate of Kappa Delta Phi; he has honorary doctorates from the Universities of Turku (Finland), and Leicester. He is co-founder and Managing Editor of the Journal of Education Policy), 2017, "Laboring to Relate: Neoliberalism, Embodied Policy, and Network Dynamics," Peabody Journal of Education, 92:1, 29-41, DOI: 10.1080/0161956X.2016.1264802, this part is pgs. 37-39 | 9/18/21 |
SeptOct K - Dean Cap v3Tournament: Valley | Round: 5 | Opponent: Millard North AR | Judge: Dylan Jones The plan's focus on medicine trades off with a more holistic approach to healthcare – that ensures health inequities while not solving the root of the problem.Sell and Williams, 20 The aff engages in fragmentation through small gestures of resistance that fail to challenge the underlying structure of capitalism, accepting its inevitability. This reproduces melancholia where leftist politics relish marginal change and small legislative victories but fail to engage in true opposition to capitalism, dooming themselves to politics at the margins.~Dean, Jodi. "Communist desire."The Ends of History. Routledge, 2013. 14-31.~ WWEY Capitalism is the root cause of all forms of violence – ~racism, sexism, xenophobia, pandemics, famine, climate change, and nuclear proliferation~ are all direct results of its desire to over commodify – and it is definitionally unable to conceive of its own demise, therefore woefully unequipped to challenge existential threatsJohn Bellamy Foster 19 (John Bellamy Foster is an American professor of sociology at the University of Oregon and editor of the Monthly Review. He writes about political economy of capitalism and economic crisis, ecology and ecological crisis, and Marxist theory. ) "Capitalism Has Failed—What Next?" Monthly Review, 2-1-2019, https://monthlyreview.org/2019/02/01/capitalism-has-failed-what-next/. Accessed 7-9-2021, WWEY The alternative is embracing party politics. This means building a radical coalition that unifies all marginalized by different forms of oppression to challenge capitalism and imperialism. Black Panther Party proves concrete action outside of the state is possible and successful. The conditions are set for a global revolution against capitalism if and only if the neoliberal order does not corrupt the movement – means reject the perm on face due to solvency deficit.This isn't an alternative economic system – that's left for after the revolution and will be shaped through the party by comrades, means generic indicts to communism don't apply as that's not the alt and just another instance of capitalism attempting to bracket, make intelligible, and exploit worker's projects through its individualist and radically cynical and commodified perception of reality.~Curry Stephenson Malott. "In Defense of Communism Against Critical Pedagogy, Capitalism, and Trump." Critical Education 8, no. 1 (2017).~ WWEY The role of the ballot is consistency with the politics of comradery. This allows us to engage in further reaching forms of political action by expanding our horizons of what is possible and unifying all in a collective struggle.Jodi Dean 19 () "Comrade - An Essay on Political Belonging" Verso, 10-01-2019, http://library.lol/main/429C9EC2E2F0AA8DCC33FE2CC178B11D. Accessed 6-27-2021, WWEY Neoliberalism infects policy education – you should prioritize epistemologically challenging itBall 17 Stephen J. Ball (Distinguished Service Professor of Sociology of Education at the University College London, Institute of Education. He was elected Fellow of the British Academy in 2006; and is also Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences; and Society of Educational Studies, and a Laureate of Kappa Delta Phi; he has honorary doctorates from the Universities of Turku (Finland), and Leicester. He is co-founder and Managing Editor of the Journal of Education Policy), 2017, "Laboring to Relate: Neoliberalism, Embodied Policy, and Network Dynamics," Peabody Journal of Education, 92:1, 29-41, DOI: 10.1080/0161956X.2016.1264802, this part is pgs. 37-39 | 9/26/21 |
SeptOct NC - Hobbes v1Tournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Olympia OE | Judge: Abhilash Datti 1nc – ncPermissibility negates:1) negate means "to deny the truth of," so the neg can disprove an obligation through permissibility since the 1ac must defend an active obligation to act 2) there is a trichotomy between obligation, prohibition and permissibility; proving onedisproves the other two.3) Ought implies proactive justification since we don't take actions unless we have a reason to take the action.Presumption negates:1) We assume statements to be false until proven true. That is why we don't believe in alternate realities or conspiracy theories. The lack of a reason to believe something is false does not mean it is assumed to be true. The black swan disproved the statement "all swans are white." The meta-ethic is constructivism – morality is constructed through social interactions and does not exist a priori. Prefer –a~ Rule-following paradox—rules are infinitely regressive because they rely on more rules to explain them that are based in social understanding. The state of nature necessitates infinite violence between conflicting world views –a~ Pre-emption—if there's no basis to condemn actions, then everyone acts solely in their own self-interest—that means the most rational strategy is to take people out before they can hurt you There is no objective solution to this conflict, because truth is relative. Instead, conflict requires the creation of the sovereign, to resolve disputes. In exchange for their safety, subjects agree to give up their claims to meaning to the sovereign.Parrish 04 ~Parrish, Rick, (Rick Parrish teaches at Loyola University New Orleans. His current research is focused on the play of violence and respect within justice.) "Derrida'S Economy Of Violence In Hobbes' Social Contract" Theory andamp; Event, Vol. 7 No. 4, 2005, 2005, http://muse.jhu.edu/article/244119~~#back, DOA:6-30-2018 WWBW~ Thus, the standard is consistency with the will of the sovereign.Vote neg –1~ states can't have obligations to external standards like international law since their only obligation is to avoid the state of nature –the state can't restrict its own power since it exists outside the law which means the res is impossible – vote neg on presumption2~ the res implies an unchanging normative claim but this is impossible as truth is constructed through socialization and there's no guarantee that all subjects would come to the same truth claims.The metaethic takes out all paradoxes and a prioris – they attempt to construct transcendental principles of logic but that's impossible as truth is socially constructed. And, this functions on the highest layer of the substance debate – it's a fundamental epistemological and metaphysical question that frames all other forms of reasoning and linguistics. | 9/25/21 |
SeptOct NC - Hobbes v2Tournament: Valley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Lexington FV | Judge: Stephen Scopa The state of nature necessitates infinite violence between conflicting world views – There is no objective solution to this conflict, because truth is relative. Instead, conflict requires the creation of the sovereign, to resolve disputes. In exchange for their safety, subjects agree to give up their claims to meaning to the sovereign. Thus, the standard is consistency with the will of the sovereign. | 9/25/21 |
SeptOct NC - Hobbes v3Tournament: Valley | Round: 3 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit KS | Judge: Ian Matsuzeski The meta-ethic is constructivism – morality is constructed through social interactions and does not exist a priori. Prefer –a~ Rule-following paradox—rules are infinitely regressive because they rely on more rules to explain them that are based in social understanding. The state of nature necessitates infinite violence between conflicting world views –a~ Pre-emption—if there's no basis to condemn actions, then everyone acts solely in their own self-interest—that means the most rational strategy is to take people out before they can hurt you There is no objective solution to this conflict, because truth is relative. Instead, conflict requires the creation of the sovereign, to resolve disputes. In exchange for their safety, subjects agree to give up their claims to meaning to the sovereign.Parrish 04 ~Parrish, Rick, (Rick Parrish teaches at Loyola University New Orleans. His current research is focused on the play of violence and respect within justice.) "Derrida'S Economy Of Violence In Hobbes' Social Contract" Theory andamp; Event, Vol. 7 No. 4, 2005, 2005, http://muse.jhu.edu/article/244119~~#back, DOA:6-30-2018 WWBW~ Thus, the standard is consistency with the will of the sovereign.Vote neg –1~ states can't have obligations to external standards like international law since their only obligation is to avoid the state of nature –the state can't restrict its own power since it exists outside the law which means the res is impossible – vote neg on presumption2~ the res implies an unchanging normative claim but this is impossible as truth is constructed through socialization and there's no guarantee that all subjects would come to the same truth claims. | 9/25/21 |
SeptOct NC - Res Incoherent and ParadoxesTournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Olympia OE | Judge: Abhilash Datti 1~ member is "a part or organ of the body, especially a limb" but an organ can't have obligations2~ of is to "expressing an age" but the rez doesn't delineate a length of time3~ the is "denoting a disease or affliction" but the WTO isn't a disease4~ to is to "expressing motion in the direction of (a particular location)" but the rez doesn't have a location5~ reduce is to "(of a person) lose weight, typically by dieting" but IP doesn't have a body to lose weight.6~ for is "in place of" but medicines aren't replacing IP.7~ medicine is "(especially among some North American Indian peoples) a spell, charm, or fetish believed to have healing, protective, or other power" but you can't have IP for a spell.8~ Trade means "a publication intended for persons in the entertainment business"(Merriam Webster) but a world entertainment business cannot reduce intellectual property making the resolution incoherent.9~ Intellectual is defined as "possessing or showing intellect or mental compacity" (Dictionary.com) but property cant possess intellect so the resolutions incoherent10~ Property means "a building" (Oxford Languages) so reducing intellectual buildings is incoherentPrefer additionally1~ Decision Making Paradox- in order to decide to do the affirmative we need a decision-making procedure to enact it but to choose a decision-making procedure requires another decision making procedure leading to infinite regress.2~ The Place Paradox- if everything exists in a place in space time, that place must also have a place that it exists in and that larger place needs a larger location to infinity. Therefore, ought statements are impossible since statements assume acting on objects in the space-time continuum.3~ Grain Paradox- A single grain of millet makes no sound upon falling, but a thousand grains make a sound. But a thousand nothings cannot make something.4~ Arrows Paradox- If we divide time into discrete 0-duration slices, no motion is happening in each of them, so taking them all as a whole, motion is impossible.5~ Meno's Paradox - in order to discover something, it must not be known, but in order to know to discover something, it must already be known – this makes the quest for knowledge incomprehensible and thus impossible | 9/25/21 |
SeptOct T GenericTournament: Valley | Round: 5 | Opponent: Millard North AR | Judge: Dylan Jones 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.Leslie 16 Leslie, Sarah-Jane ~Sarah-Jane Leslie (Ph.D., Princeton, 2007) is the dean of the Graduate School and Class of 1943 Professor of Philosophy. She has previously 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. She is also affiliated faculty in the Department of Psychology, the University Center for Human Values, the Program in Gender and Sexuality Studies, and the Kahneman-Treisman Center for Behavioral Science and Public Policy~, 4-24-2016, "Generic Generalizations (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)," https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/generics/ SM Violation: They spec secondary patents of opioid painkillers.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 | 9/26/21 |
SeptOct T MedicineTournament: Yale | Round: 3 | Opponent: Flintridge Prep TV | Judge: Nathaniel Tran Interpretation: The affirmative debater must defend the reduction of intellectual property protections for medicinesViolation: Vaccines aren't medicine, merriam webster defines medicine as a substance or preparation used in treating disease (hyperlinked)Negate on Jurisdiction – The judge can only vote on positions that meet the burdens of the res otherwise you could literally hand the judge 5 bucks and say vote for me and there would be no reason not to. Since the debater didn't present a position that was semantically coherent with the res auto negate as they literally didn't read an AC. Anything else invites judge intervention as the judge can arbitrarily set the bounds of the debate. | 9/18/21 |
TTTournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Olympia OE | Judge: Abhilash Datti Reject independent voting issues –1~ they incentivize bad-faith efforts to overwhelms the 2nr with a ton of new voters that I can't respond to effectively – that kills clash and topical education The role of the ballot is to vote for the debater who best proves the truth or falsity of the Resolution; the aff must prove it true and the neg must prove it false.Prefer: ~A~ Text: Five dictionaries define to negate as to deny the truth of and affirm as to prove true which means the sole judge obligation is to vote on the resolution's truth or falsity. This outweighs on common usage – it is abundantly clear that our roles are verified. Any other role of the ballot enforces an external norm on debate, but only truth testing is intrinsic to the process of debate i.e. proving statements true or false through argumentation. Constitutivism outweighs because you don't have the jurisdiction not to truth test – if a chess player says you should break the rules for a more fun game, the proper response is to ignore them as a practice only makes sense based on its intrinsic rules. Jurisdiction is also an independent voter and a meta constraint on anything else since every argument you make concedes the authority of the judge fulfilling their jurisdiction to vote aff if they affirm better and neg the contrary – otherwise they could just hack against or for you which means it also controls the internal link to fairness since that's definitionally unfair. ~B~ Logic: Any counter role of the ballot collapses to truth testing because every property assumes truth of the property i.e. if I say, "I am awake" it is the same as "it is true that I am awake" which means they are also a question of truth claims because it's inherent. It also means their ROB warrants aren't mutually exclusive with mine. If the aff is true the res ought to be implemented, but the res ought to only be implemented if its not already being implemented, so it ought to be that the res is not implemented. ~C~ Inclusion: Any offense can function under truth testing whereas your specific role of the ballot excludes all strategies but yours. This is bad for inclusive debates because people without every technical skill or comprehensive debate knowledge are shut out of your scholarship which turns your ROB- truth testing solves because you can do what you're good at and so can I. This is also better for education because me engaging in a debate I know nothing about doesn't help anyone. o/w since it is a real-world implication in round rather than a thought experiment that doesn't do anything | 9/25/21 |
Theory - Must not read Util or any consequentialist standardTournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Olympia OE | Judge: Abhilash Datti The neg may not read utilitarianism or any consequentialist ethical theory as a standard – a) resolvability: 1~ Induction fails—induction assumes that things will always happen the same way in the future as they have in the past. But this begs the question of how we know what happened in the past will happen in the future. Thus, induction is logically fallacious. 2~ Moral cluelessness—consequences are wholly unknowable and any action can lead to a domino effect that has unpredictable bad consequences in the end which means it can't guide action 3~ Infinite consequences—any harm stretches on into the infinite future and makes it impossible to compare harms—results in calculative regress—you have you calculate how much time to spend calculating and so on—destroys decision-making 4~ Aggregation fails—happiness is only happy for you, but not for me, so you can't compare across people—also can't compare 10 headaches to a migraine to the value of friendship b) psychological violence: util and other consequentialist theories justify atrocities such as slavery if it benefits a marginal majority or for hypothetical benefits that might not even materialize | 9/25/21 |
Theory IncoherentTournament: Yale | Round: 5 | Opponent: Olympia OE | Judge: Abhilash Datti Theory is incoherent: ~a~ The ballot is always determined off abuse and inequalities, otherwise it would be impossible to evaluate the round. ~b~ You can't evaluate theory because it's evaluating off the flow rather than making the decision of which is actually a better norm, so you can't actually be consistent with the voters. ~c~ Theory doesn't produce the best rule since it allows the better theory debater to produce rules that will benefit them. ~d~ Things get proven true in debate rounds all the time that aren't true in the real world, so theory doesn't actually achieve its purpose because it doesn't prove better norms. ~e~ It's a contradiction because you say your voter is either constitutive of or beneficial for a competitive activity, but no competitive activity would establish rules in the middle of a competition. Evaluate the theory debate after the 2n – we both get 2 speeches so its reciprocal ~f~ Theory sets bad norms because we vote for interps that are marginally better than other interps, rather the best version of the interp, so it doesn't achieve the voter. ~g~ Theory is paradoxical because it attempts to limit arguments but uses arguments to do that, which concedes the validity of arguments in the first place. ~h~ Not jurisdictional because the judge can only vote for someone proving their side of the resolution. The resolution doesn't care about whether we can debate, it just says prove your side, so theory isn't a voter. Inclusion is the fallacy of origin, don't apply it. Implications are clear out of the nc – don't allow new 2ar responses because they're functionally new arguments and there's no 3n to check. | 9/25/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
9/25/21 | etya3977@gmailcom |
| |
9/25/21 | etya3977@gmailcom |
| |
9/18/21 | etya3977@gmailcom |
| |
9/18/21 | etya3977@gmailcom |
| |
9/25/21 | etya3977@gmailcom |
|