The 3NR

Interesting

The purpose of CX is to ask questions that will help you win the debate, that should be pretty non controversial. However a lot of cx habits have been annoying me lately so here we go:

Read more…

While judging a debate recently where the aff read like 20 Mearshimer cards I went back to check the answers I cut back when I was in college and it turns out I don’t think they are quite as good as I thought they were at the time. So the challenge is to see if someone can find a better one. The most common Mearshimer evidence I have seen read comes from two articles from around 1995 mhere and mhere

Below the fold is one I thought was dec.

Read more…

Read more…

Nuance has a new free PDF reader that (in my opinion) is way better than adobe (specifically it lets you do a lot of editing things that only come on the upgraded Acrobat).

I would also point out it makes the pdf files on your desktop look much cooler

Some notes

1. Cards aren’t underlined- a few people whined to be about this. If you are so lazy that not only do you not cut your own cards, but you are complaining that the cards on 3NR aren’t spoon fed enough to you then you prob. suck and should join the band.

2. I couldn’t really decide how to approach this- obviously there is a lot of argumentative overlap between many of these positions, and if you had to give a 2NC to answer all of them it would be a nightmare/probably overrun by theory. So many of the “blocks” below are quite short, and would need to be elaborated upon if the aff chose to go for that argument in the 1AR.

3. Evidence over me talking- many of the better arguments I chose not to belabor and instead provided a card that explains them- I could go either way on whether it is better to have a card or your own explanation, but since I think a lot of people may just cut and paste out of here prob. better they have a card. Let me repeat that for those of you reading this who want to be really good at debate- the cards here contain every argument you need to crush on the neg for the reps K- if you read them carefully, repeatedly, and master then you will be much better off than if you cut and paste a bunch of theory blocks together.

Read more…

I have for a long time assumed that people would agree with me on the following:

On an issue that is not time sensitive, say whether or not Nihilism is good for value to life, I would much rather have a significantly older but better card, then a much more recent but slightly worse card.

Read more…

An interesting article about human nature perhaps relevant to many K debates

For this I will defend the Neg reading a reps K vs any theory argument or permutation based arg about why K’s that don’t link to the plan are legitimate.

Assume for the 1NC the neg read this card from the reps card picking thread as a justification for why reps matter:

Read more…

Damien v Whitney Young

Bronx v Westlake

GBS v Hooch CR

Woodward v Westminster