[eDebate] *Legal Topic Good*
Thu Apr 6 17:12:30 CDT 2006
So I guess this post will just begin another long edebate discussion on
switch side debate being good or bad--- I would rather someone post the
topic papers that have been submitted so we can begin discussions on the
topic area?s and then later on discuss rater bidirectional resolutions are
good or bad. However, until the the post is made about possible topic
area?s let?s talk shop on bidirectional topics.
Matt your increases education argument is not limited to a bidirectional
topic. A topic that is not bidirectional still has debaters doing research
on both sides of the topic. I believe this to be called affirmative and
negative research. If you need an example of this you should check with the
debater that did your pressure file, china democracy file, and incentives
file to name just a few files. Even without a bidirectional topic there is
still in depth research on plan ?mechanisms? because you can use the
?mechanisms? that are not topical as counterplans. As for pick an
affirmative that you truly believe in, I mean, talk with OU cj, they seemed
to have an arguably topical affirmative this year. Also not every topic is
going to be able to accommodate the beliefs and values of every debater, so
that is why you get to affirm and negate a topic?BAM switch side debate
Now for your B subpoint- Well you are right the you need to go both ways on
an argument and switch side debate allows for this, but a bidirectional
topic destroys the predictable ground for the affirmative and negative.
Small schools need to have a predictable counterplan and disadvantage
research ground to compete with larger schools abilities to have multiple
affirmatives. I guess I like to call this the meatball strategy, the strat
you can prep and know it is going to work if someone breaks new. I have
also heard this referred to as a generic negative strategy.
So your C subpoint is just a reason that well worded topics are good. The
predictability factor is lost in a bidirectional topic because you no longer
have core negative and affirmative ground. I am unsure how a ?worded
properly? resolution would help set predictable ground for the negative if
the topic is bidirectional, please explain?
Now subpoint D is more of just a example of something you should put in your
judging philosophy. I mean if you do not like topicality debates and
debates about Fiat/resolutionality just put it in your philosophy.
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
More information about the Mailman