[eDebate] *Legal Topic Good*

[Louie Petit]

So I guess this post will just begin another long edebate discussion on 
switch side debate being good or bad---  I would rather someone post the 
topic papers that have been submitted so we can begin discussions on the 
topic area’s and then later on discuss rater bidirectional resolutions are 
good or bad.  However, until the the post is made about possible topic 
area’s let’s talk shop on bidirectional topics.

Matt your increases education argument is not limited to a bidirectional 
topic.  A topic that is not bidirectional still has debaters doing research 
on both sides of the topic.  I believe this to be called affirmative and 
negative research.  If you need an example of this you should check with the 
debater that did your pressure file, china democracy file, and incentives 
file to name just a few files.  Even without a bidirectional topic there is 
still in depth research on plan “mechanisms” because you can use the 
“mechanisms” that are not topical as counterplans.  As for pick an 
affirmative that you truly believe in, I mean, talk with OU cj, they seemed 
to have an arguably topical affirmative this year.  Also not every topic is 
going to be able to accommodate the beliefs and values of every debater, so 
that is why you get to affirm and negate a topic—BAM switch side debate 
solves…
Now for your B subpoint- Well you are right the you need to go both ways on 
an argument and switch side debate allows for this, but a bidirectional 
topic destroys the predictable ground for the affirmative and negative.  
Small schools need to have a predictable counterplan and disadvantage 
research ground to compete with larger schools abilities to have multiple 
affirmatives.  I guess I like to call this the meatball strategy, the strat 
you can prep and know it is going to work if someone breaks new.  I have 
also heard this referred to as a generic negative strategy.
So your C subpoint is just a reason that well worded topics are good.  The 
predictability factor is lost in a bidirectional topic because you no longer 
have core negative and affirmative ground.  I am unsure how a “worded 
properly” resolution would help set predictable ground for the negative if 
the topic is bidirectional, please explain?
Now subpoint D is more of just a example of something you should put in your 
judging philosophy.  I mean if you do not like topicality debates and 
debates about Fiat/resolutionality just put it in your philosophy.

Louie Petit

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/