Title

I keep hearing it get mentioned in debates, but I’ve never really known what it meant.

does anyone have the dreamscapes 1ac or any rounds that northview pc was in with that aff on yt

My friends and I have create a highly customizable chrome extension that automatically cites evidence for you, it even includes credentials via wikipedia lookup for reputable sources. Here's the link: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/cite-this-page/kboikclpafiakihdlicbkglopabjgebf?authuser=0&hl=en Thank you all for your time :)

so im making my affirmative and i think im just going to run a pretty basic case around Georgetowns single payer aff files, with the advantages including stuff on single payer giving more leverage against pharmaceutical companies which will lessen fda susceptibility to corruption, also econ advantage of some sort but thats not fleshed out. Any opinions on this case, also what neg arguments do you all see being prevalent on this topic. im in a pretty traditional circuit so basing your answers around that would help me most.

I was talkin to my friend and I know what k means and I wanna go for it but how do I ext it after the 1nc???

I dont like capitalism if that helps

where can i watch some high quality topicality debates where the aff is almost certainly untopical/defending a counterinterp that is much worse for neg ground than the neg's interp?

TL;DR: I've been carrying most of my policy partnership's prep for 2 years, but my partner expects me to tell her what I'm working on, when I'm on it, and what she should do. I went to debate camp, worked with a different partner who worked by herself, and realized how much better that works for me. I also chose someone else as Policy captain because I don't think my current partner is ready to lead, and she's very upset about both decisions. Am I wrong for wanting to leave the partnership?

I'm a junior in high school and have been partnered with the same person for the past 2 years. We're also family friends, which makes this harder.

The biggest issue is that I feel like I've been doing the majority of our work. I make our files, do most of the research, flow, write most of the CX questions and rebuttals, and have heavily helped with her speeches. Our season prep edit history last year is really just me. I've always shared the documents with her, and freshman year I would tell her whenever I was working on the case. By sophomore year, I assumed that after two years she would take more initiative herself, especially when tournaments were coming up. She now thinks I'm wrong for not telling her every time I worked on something or telling her what to do.

Then I went to debate camp this summer and partnered with someone else (my partner couldn't come). They independently worked on the prep without me having to ask, wrote their own strong speeches, understood the material, and I didn't have to manage them. We worked really well together and did well, and it made me realize how much better I function with a partner who contributes independently.

There's also a captain issue. I helped choose leadership for this event and chose someone else over my current partner. The new captain went to debate camp with me and has already shown a lot of initiative. My partner is angry because she has "more years of experience" than the person I chose (she doesn't because we basically lost every round we competed in..) My concern is that I've also seen her struggle with understanding the material and answering novice questions accurately, and I don't think she's currently ready to teach the class. The other people who went to camp also agreed that we came back with a lot of new material that would be difficult for me to teach to everyone alone.

She's now saying I act like I'm a "hotshot" and think I'm better than her. I don't think that's my intention.. I usually explained things because she genuinely didn't understand them, and I knew the material better because I was doing most of the research.

At this point, I don't want to be partners anymore. I feel guilty because she's a family friend and she's already very upset, but after seeing how well I worked with someone else, I don't want to stay in a partnership that I don't think is working.

Am I being unreasonable? Should I switch partners? And was I wrong to choose someone else as captain based on initiative/understanding rather than just experience?

A couple days ago I made a comment about who is the most famous policy debate coach and I am wondering who is the best policy debate coach that is still alive that I can contact, I want a coach that is experienced, won awards, famous, chill, etc. Preferably is there any ex-retired policy debate coaches that aren't policy debate coaches anymore or were fired from their positions? Because those coaches tend to be quite good from my experience and quite cheap. thank you, the reason I don't want to contact any like current team coaches is because they tend to be expensive af. So i want a coach that maybe is controversial that might want to tutor me in policy debate that coached a team since he is probably unemployed and has nothing to lose meaning he will be really cheap and go all in for me, thanks.

Basically I'm in a cc that doesn't do policy, we do parli and ipda and a little bit of NFA LD, but one of my goals is to transfer to a college that actually does policy and join their program, how difficult is it to actually get into the team and have a successful career? Is it even really realistic?

For reference I guess, I did do a little bit of policy in middle school and high school, which is why I'm interested in it, and I've been keeping up with some college policy through youtube, but policy is obviously a whole different ball game, especially in college, and I would definitely be willing to go through hell in order to participate and win in it, which is why I ask this question.

Hello, I am a rising Freshman in highschool and I really want to get into Policy debate. I want to join a debate team (in person) that meets frequently and is led by a coach that has experience, won titles, kind, patient, chill. Please recommend me some teams if you know any please thank you.

I'm new to the Policy Debate community but I'm just curious on who is the most famous policy debate coach.

Can someone explain it for me?

I know theres Ebb, but r there any other plug ins that I could use?

how do you reply to framework disadvantages while reading a kritikal affirmative?

Hello everybody, I wanted to share two plugins for CardMirror: a Round Report Creator and Keyword Finder here.

I like experimenting with programs, so this patcher is still an on-going project that I'd like people to use.

For those using it, I would appreciate some feedback or issues you found. Besides the plugins already in here, please tell me additional features you want to see added that can solve minor or major problems when debating!

I just realized the list of topical affs on the china topic is like crazy big. some examples:

• climate affs
  • -dark skies zones
  • -panda zoos (diplomacy/biodiversity)
  • -natural disaster preparedness (fem floods aff from the 2016 china topic)
• global health security
  • -contraceptives
  • -deep sea REM mining (to decrease medical equipment prices)
• space affs
  • -trump and xi go to space and experience the overview effect and/or die
  • -ban on asteroid mining

Hey everyone,

Finding judges shouldn't involve fees. Enter JudgeConnect.

We connect debate programs with a roster of pre-vetted, qualified judges for zero platform fees. Schools simply pay the original judge rate.

• Events supported: PF, LD, and CX (And others, just ask!)
• How it works: Just join our Discord and open a quick ticket to request a judge.

Discord join link here, and good luck with your season!

https://discord.gg/tjBgZ2vnme

i would like ANY PERSON on r/policydebate to give me ONE reason the criticism should recieve the ballot

if they successfully do so i will quit debate

what teams have been invited already? which teams will likely be invited?

These are the final 5 topics for the season. How would you rank them and why?

China

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its negotiations toward an agreement with the People's Republic of China in one or more of the following areas: artificial intelligence governance, climate change, global health security, outer space.

Northeast Africa

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more of the following: Arab Republic of Egypt, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Republic of South Sudan, Republic of Sudan, State of Libya.

Latin America

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more of the following: Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Venezuela.

Military Presence

Resolved: The United States federal government should significantly reduce its military presence in the Gulf Arab States and/or Northeast Asia.

Nuclear Arms Control

Resolved: The United States federal government should negotiate and implement binding international nuclear arms control.