r/policydebate

what’s the best caselist aff

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

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

Title. Getting a new laptop (it won't be a windows laptop for reasons extraneous to debate), and was wondering what mac would be best for debate. For context, I currently have an Intel Mac from 2019. It overheats hella when I open more than like five files and has zero battery life. Does anyone with a more recent mac have a laptop that can:

1. Open files quickly (like a 300-400 page file in <3.5 seconds.

2. Have good battery life

3. Not overheat super quickly.

Thanks!

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.

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?

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

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.

Hi I'm a student in college and my college is like a tier 2 college the children there are not so passionate about things same is my college and i see people from tier 1 college going to gd rounds interview and debates and building their speaking and excelling in their speaking skills so I m finding people who are at the same page and actually want to build their speaking skills we can do a google meet and I have many ideas on which we can talk to like a gd round we can use ai also just for the topic
If anyone is interested pls dm me if we become a group of 5 to 6 then we will arrange a meeting
PLS ONLY SERIOUS PEOPLE DM IF YOU ARE GENUINELY INTRESTED NO FIGHTS NO MISBEHAVIOR

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

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

Can someone explain it for me?

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

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.

Have you ever wanted to win the TOC? Maybe swipe that first-round bid to the NDT? If you're FROTHING at the mouth like I am, I'm certain you'll want to hear what I have to say. It is I, DaddyDebates, back again. As the greatest policy debater of this generation, I feel now it is fitting I introduce the secret to my success: an all-new debate technological innovation so awesome it would make Aschenbrenner tremble.

Let me introduce to you my newest product: the Ballot Understanding LLm Sheet-integrated Honed Instrument of Technology, or B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. for short.

Here at B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. technologies, we do all that we can to ensure that our most cutting edge technology is extremely accessible and small-school friendly. Our mission is to build off the staples of the debate community such as Truf releasing CardMirror free of charge. For that reason, we will begin base pricing of our frontier model at the low price of 99$ a month. I'm also happy to announce that if you send us your government ID, social security number, and comprehensive eye-scan verification, we will be able to confirm whether or not you attend a small school and give you a generous discount down to the low low 98$ a month. I mean, you're practically ROBBING me at this point!

B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. technologies prides itself on our development team. Our team consists of talented individuals, tirelessly swiping Instagram reels as they wait for their Claude prompt to finish coding the newest addition to the amalgamation of features trying to pass as debate software. Now, in alpha-testing, there's been a TON of complaints about these things called "bugs" present throughout our software. To that I say, Fuck you! It's not our fault, it's Claude's! Why don't you yell at it instead! You mean you EXPECTED us to TEST our software before we released it? You bought this B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. you can deal with it too. If you really think its that easy, why don't you vibe-code it yourself huh?

Of course, B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. is also here to address your concerns. Some judges and coaches have been concerned that the increase in debate technology had led to a decrease in student skill, learning, flowing, and overall debate aptitude. However, these yappers clearly haven't been fed some B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. If we can eliminate the need for flowing in the first place, why are you even worried about it? I'm happy to announce that the primary and new staple feature of B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. contains an all-new auto-flower and argument-response creator that eliminates the need for ALL THINKING during the debate round! When you're going for your usual fiat K or wipeout now, you don't just have to be spewing bullshit from your mouth, you can also be reading straight B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. off your computer in real-time!

Below is an excerpt licensing agreement you will sign when buying some B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T.

1. By signing, I agree to hand over my soul and related artifacts to B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. technologies, recognizing they have the right to fuck up my debate software at any time they please.

2. I will not use my Claude agent to easily replicate our application, as that would deprave B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. of your hard earned money. Pirating is also staunchly unethical, as debaters we've learned that high-paywalled academia is to be always respected and never questioned.

3. B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. technologies is not responsible for any real-life or real-company parallels a reader may make in their mind as a result of this post: it is a figment of your imagination or pure coincidence.

4. Some people may ask why they would use B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. instead of CardMirror when the latter is free, optimized by actual usage, and receives constant automated updates. Signing this agreement waives your right to asking "silly" questions like this in the future.

5. I will blindly trust that B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T. technologies does not put some kind of backdoor into their technology to allow them to access new files that you have not broken yet at the benefit of the teams the owners are coaching, and recognize that although it is a possibility, we reserve the right to do it without telling you!

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

The Fiat K is truly the pinnacle of debate theory because it bravely asks the groundbreaking question: “What if fiat… wasn’t real?” Suddenly, every plan becomes a dangerous act of imaginary policymaking, and the simple phrase “the government should” carries the weight of centuries of ontological violence. Why bother discussing whether the policy is good when we can instead spend eight minutes proving that imagining its implementation is itself the problem? The Fiat K transcends ordinary debate—it doesn’t just reject the plan; it rejects the very possibility that saying something should happen could ever make it happen. Truly revolutionary.

Now I know what your thinking doesn’t this seem a little unfair YOUR WRONG FIAT causes inverted spirit death murder on somebody for some reason. Vote neg fiat is bad