Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by masturdebater69

  1. Indiana made it to elims for the first time in their program's history, which is pretty cool.
  2. masturdebater69


    What are good drills/practices to do to improve overall skill? I don't mean spreading drills (ie spreading with a pen in your mouth, putting and between each word, etc) but things that improve other skills like efficiency, strategy, line-by-line, impact calc, etc.
  3. Willing to do some V-debates, aff or neg, just as long as you're willing to see the debate through to the end.
  4. How exactly does ndt participation affect overall college debate participation?
  5. Slightly off-topic, but what happened to UChicago's policy team?
  6. https://www.speechanddebate.org/topics/ It's officially arms sales........ Looks like we're in for a third year of a billion tiny soft-left affs and bad generics.
  7. Now that NSDA voting is out, which topic do you think will win and which will you be voting for? Both arm sales and nukes seem like they will be big topics, but there might actually be decent topic DAs for the first time in a while. My problem with nukes is its bidirectionality and that there's really only one impact, but on the other hand, it seems interesting and could wind up being awesome.
  8. On tabroom if you log in on the account you use to register to the tournament you'll find a tab on the tournament page that says prefs, click on that and you'll find a spreadsheet with every judge for the tournament. You can look at their paradigm by clicking their name, and based off that you give them a rating by bubbling a number on that spreadsheet 1- whatever number the tournament goes to (for example 1-8 for glenbrooks) where 1 is best and lowest number is the worst + S if you want to strike them. Typically you have to pref a certain number of judges a certain rating, such as a maximum or minimum for each rating.
  9. I thought that topic was awesome, but to be fair I was a novice and in my area they restrict novice cases to four.
  10. I definitely agree that the first two topics stand out as the best. While I haven't looked into it much, I think Middle East would be bad because Iran would say no, Syrian instability would deck solvency, leaving only really Saudi Arabia. Nuclear Policy would be interesting, my only problem with it is it's bidirectionality, which be underlimiting. Treaties is the worst in my opinion, where there are really only 5 cases but the aff is allowed to spike out of any parts of the treaties that neg may have DAs to.
  11. Basically what is says on the tin. What disads do people think are the best this year?
  12. 1. Will the counterplan be approved/passed through congress? 2. Where specifically in your McManus evidence does it say pro-immigration bills help Supreme Leader Donald J. Trump spin the dialogue? 3. What are the risks of an unchecked Supreme Leader Donald J. Trump?
  13. Cross-ex 1. What is the net benefit to the counterplan? How does it avoid it? 2. Where does your McManus evidence say passing pro-immigration policy will help Supreme Leader Donald J. Trump in the midterms? 3. Where in your Klass evidence does it account for perception abroad as opposed to domestically? 4. How do we create a "good immigrant-bad immigrant" distinction? 5. What is "the party"? How do Party politics solve for neoliberalism? 6. With the victimization argument, can the plan happen under your method?
  14. The CP, K, T, and case are the 2nc and the DAs are the 1NR. We argue those planks do exist, and even if they don't the others are sufficient to solve by allowing in more refugees and making it easier. An immediate result of your plan. We argue it is bad. The neg has conditionality, meaning we only need to win one to prove the aff false. Bostrum 13, Yudkowsky 6, Meyer 16, Jablonowski 10, Cummiskey ‘96. Basically what was read in the 1NC on the advantage flow. We fiat the court passing the counterplan. There's been no reason in round given as to why we'd need a test case. We aren't erasing them, just the counterplan would rule in favor of doing that. Ronald D. Vitiello is the director of ICE.
  15. The Kavanaugh confirmation bad version probably still can work.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use