Re: T = voter

[Earl Croasmun <croasmun@luna.cas.usf.edu>]

On Mon, 16 Oct 1995 BLechtreck@aol.com wrote:

> Not everyone operates
> under a stock issues paradigm where T is a voter. 

The idea that debaters are supposed to affirm or negate the chosen topic 
seems awfully paradigm-invariant.  I thought the paradigm controversies 
had been dead (and unmourned) for several years.  Is there some new 
paradigm which says that an affirmative can ignore the topic and run 
whatever they feel is their favorite affirmative case?  [That is, after 
all, the implication of seriously arguing that topicality is not a voting 
issue.]

> Tournament invites tell us what the times will be for each of the speeches.
> If it also said T was a voter (ie: it is no longer an ambiguous uncertainty),
> you would have a proper comparison.

Are there any tournaments that say "topic: none?"  [Other than Heart, of
course.]

---

References:

• Re: T = voter
• From: BLechtreck@aol.com

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Level Playing Field
• Next by Date: Open Results L&C
• Prev by thread: Re: T = voter
• Next by thread: Re: T = voter
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

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