kissmycls
11-29-06, 12:45 PM
This is from the 2006 NPDA.
Jeff Fisher – Mount Hood Community College
First off, my background is in old school parli and I champion communication over a massive overload of information. If
you sound like a Muppet on crack, you might be part of the former group. I’m not huge on policy jargon nor do I care on
how an argument is constructed. An argument is an argument as long as it’s impacted.Remember that. Speed and flow: I
can flow as fast as anyone else but see above. Fiat: I live in the real world and so should you. There’s no such thing as
“policy world” and thus please justify your fiat. It’s better to error on the side of not doing it. Otherwise, Fiat is a small
car, preferably red. Counterplan: My belief is that the Gov/Aff has the burden of proof. Counterplans just put Opp/Neg in
a position to do the same when they don’t have to. Counterplans must be non-topical and of course, mutually exclusive.
Voters: Please do not just regurgitate case for me. I need clear reasons why you have won the debate. Topicality and
other “procedurals”: I despise “canned” cases so I do pick up topicality but please don’t take this as an invitation to run
topicality when it isn’t needed. I will also drop teams for “a priori” violations. Like any other argument, impact any
possible violations.
Jeff Fisher – Mount Hood Community College
First off, my background is in old school parli and I champion communication over a massive overload of information. If
you sound like a Muppet on crack, you might be part of the former group. I’m not huge on policy jargon nor do I care on
how an argument is constructed. An argument is an argument as long as it’s impacted.Remember that. Speed and flow: I
can flow as fast as anyone else but see above. Fiat: I live in the real world and so should you. There’s no such thing as
“policy world” and thus please justify your fiat. It’s better to error on the side of not doing it. Otherwise, Fiat is a small
car, preferably red. Counterplan: My belief is that the Gov/Aff has the burden of proof. Counterplans just put Opp/Neg in
a position to do the same when they don’t have to. Counterplans must be non-topical and of course, mutually exclusive.
Voters: Please do not just regurgitate case for me. I need clear reasons why you have won the debate. Topicality and
other “procedurals”: I despise “canned” cases so I do pick up topicality but please don’t take this as an invitation to run
topicality when it isn’t needed. I will also drop teams for “a priori” violations. Like any other argument, impact any
possible violations.