[eDebate] Topic Voting
Morris, Eric R
Thu Jul 12 23:43:52 CDT 2007
I agree with Scott completely that topic #1 is the best. I would suggest
topic #3 as a 2nd choice because the uniqueness problems are nowhere
near as significant a problem as the trilateral issue or the "only"
The word "only" is particularly concerning. People have won rounds on
offset counterplans with 'increase' topics - keep that in mind and think
about the CP tricks you can play with a topic including the word 'only'.
The process of sorting out whether permutations of plan-plus
counterplans proved that the original plan violated the word "only" by
not being exclusive sounds like an exercise of judge intervention of the
worst kind. Even if the community comes to some consensus on how to deal
with that, there will be a lot of losses on the question.
I felt like I have a pretty good understanding of a trilateral security
guarantee, but not much definitional support to win the T violation.
Also, the CP that adds Syria, for example, to the US-Lebanon-Israel
peace deal might be an interesting debate, but having the topic lock
that kind of strategy in seems like it imposes a really harsh burden on
the affirmative literature base.
Resolutions 2 & 4 aren't "only" a "trilateral security guarantee" but
also an invitation to spend a semester doling out the losses while we
try to reconcile how the norm against plan-plus CP competition plays out
with the resolution's wording. Yuk.
Unlike Scott, I don't quite enjoy the expansion of aff ground entailed
in foreign assistance. That said, the problem is manageable. Small,
insignificant aid will be easy to CP out, and the general utility of
small affirmatives with a wall of uniqueness has greatly diminished
given the growth of the K. Further, the state of the US relationship
with the five countries implies that giving any aid will have some
political ramification. Also, I bet several plans will have both SG and
FA - letting people follow their solvency articles seems a good idea.
Finally, if the literature on the security guarantees starts to feel
stale, there will at least be another option.
My idea topic would be something like topic 1 without the FA option. But
the foreign assistance option would be much easier to prepare for than
predicting how judges will see the only/trilateral problem.
More information about the Mailman