effects counterplans

[Debateone@aol.com]

Does anyone think clever/smart/experienced affirmatives will argue that
effects is illegitimate or that the counterplan is actually topical despite
its nature of effects?

Discount the notion of perms and mutual exclusivity, for they are irrelevant
to the discussion of the topical nature of the counterplan.

Let me add another scenario that might become confusing yet thought
provoking.  What happens if 1N argues that aff case is effects.  In another
position, 1N argues that the counterplan is non-topical by effects. Does this
open up a veritable can of worms.  Who benefits from such an offering, the
aff or neg.

Food for thought.

Mark J. Jones
California Lutheran University

---

Follow-Ups:

• NIU
• From: "Michael K. Davis" <davismk@mailbox.syr.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Let me try again..
• Next by Date: No Subject
• Prev by thread: nationals business meeting
• Next by thread: NIU
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

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