Re: Hypo.Counterplan Scenario

[BLechtreck@aol.com]

>>>>>>>>>>
Hypothetical Scenario 1:

2NR kicks down to a D/A that doesn't outweigh case, but comes 
lose, and a Delay C/P (Aff.'s Plan delayed to a point in time where 
it wouldn't link to the D/A) thats  Net Benefit is that it doesn't 
link to the D/A.  Aff. arguement is that C/P is topical, Neg. 
arguement: Net Benefit checks abuse. Assuming their is no harm in delaying
plan action, and that Neg. is winning the D/A and the 
Perm/Net Benefit arguements on the C/P, would you vote for the C/P or reject
the C/P  because it is topical and vote Aff.? 
>>>>>>>>>>

Unless aff gives m some good reasons that a topical aff = aff ballot, I vote
neg. There is no reason not to vote for a time frame C/P, so absent a more
compelling story from the aff, it's an easy ballot.

>>>>>>>>>>
1NC runs a conditional C/P, 2NC runs a 2nd conditional C/P (can 
 you say "Abusive"? (-:  ),  2NR goes for both, indicating that C/P's should
be weighed independently vs. the plan (cp1 vs. plan, cp2 vs. plan), and that
 they only have to win one. Assuming neg is winning 1 C/P, but not the other,
how would  you reconcile the round?  
>>>>>>>>>>

Since either C/P tests the opportunity cost of the plan, neg only needs to
win 1 of the C/Ps to win the round (assuming they are net beneficial or ME).

This might be different if C/Ps were advocated, but since they're not, neg
wins.

Peace,

Bob Lechtreck
Bakersfield College

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Over"Bear"ing
• Next by Date: Re: Johnson and Mexico
• Prev by thread: Re: Hypo.Counterplan Scenario
• Next by thread: Re: non-Mexico Mexico
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page