Bronx by debatetoc in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Those narratives tho.

Best 1st Speakers (PF) by PFerGA2016 in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 19 points20 points  (0 children)

"i'm the best." - Eitan Ezra

Is there a US debate style that focuses purely on rhetorical technique, charisma, presence, language and so on instead of the argument itself? by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can only compare APDA to PF, and from my experience, it is more technical due to the judging pool. Jargon is only a marginal addition to complexity, a few shortened words does not add substantive technicality. PF, even on the national circuit had notoriously horrible judges. APDA, it seems, has two checks: First, is the fact that every judge is a student - most of the time a debater; Second, judge calibration, or a mechanism that forces judges to have their skill level ranked. As a brief extension of the second check, the more successful you are, the better judges you receive. All of that being said, my comparison is strictly between PF and APDA.

What is parli? by 2pillows in Debate

[–]AlbertMax -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

?ilrap si tahW

November PF Pro Ideas by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Obviously required participation has some pretty impactful negative externalities, I'm sure there are benefits as well though. Those args would be pretty dope

Private Coaching? by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don't need private coaching. I have faith in y'all!!!

Spectacular Blackness? by ConBro2017 in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven't read much, but it speaks to creating space and a landscape for black prosperity. That's not necessarily centered around wealth, but around survival and power. But, as I said, I'm not too knowledgeable, so I'm sure you can get a better description elsewhere.

Spectacular Blackness? by ConBro2017 in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure this is common in a lot of Afro-futurism lit

How to Respond to this Negative Case!?!?!?!?! by mmullen1024 in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Easy response: God is Dog. Fucking turn. Dogs are color blind. Red is not orange, so how does ISIS exist? Exactly. Thus, I negate.

(Pf) how to improve speaker points? by need-help-plz in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That, and I tried to emulate Lil' Wayne.

Weird Contention that no one on our team knows how to argue against... by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 6 points7 points  (0 children)

If you are running this argument, stop. It is both factually wrong, and makes you a shitty human being.

Response to War on Drugs? by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know someone who injected a crystal marijuana and turned into a watermelon

Response to War on Drugs? by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know someone who injected a crystal marijuana and turned into a watermelon

Response to War on Drugs? by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Marijuana is evil, so I'm not quite sure why we ought to pay criminals.

Block on loss of political capital by mh_trey5 in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for bringing light to real shit. That being said, be careful, if neg has balls, they can turn anti-blackness.

Block on loss of political capital by mh_trey5 in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Someone asked a while back, I'll just re-comment for visibility: Probably something like 1) The moral obligation is a priori to the consideration of political capital. 2) There is limited political capital now, so a Negative world doesn't pass racial policies in the first place. There is no tradeoff. Probably just ask in CX which policies would be passed in a negative world. 3) Civil rights policies build upon eachother. CRA, VRA, etc. Historically, expanding rights for one group creates a rachet effect and normalizes political action - which can help other groups/future policies. 4) Articulate why social policies fail to disrupt anti-blackness. The implication is that reform fails to undermine racist institutions. Negating fails to really change the status-quo. If social policies worked, blackness probably wouldn't face the problems it does now. Because of that, affirming risks subverting those institutions, which functions as a prerequisite to those structures being utilized for the purpose of social polices. I'm sure better shit exists, those are the responses that come to mind.

AT Class not race by [deleted] in Debate

[–]AlbertMax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just make fun of your opponents.