7/31/2019 Applying Policy Values to Public Forum
1/2
Applying Policy Values to Public Forum
The general underlying premise of argument is the same in all
events NFL rules ban counter plans and critiques in public forum in
theory Policy Debate Plan
o What the affirmative believes should be done Requires certain
text
o Policy- We should draw all forces from Japano Pufo- Contention
1) Withdrawing troops from Japan is beneficial to the United
States
o Even in public forum, in the back of your mind, you should
have a line ofadvocacy
o IN case-writing avoid being overly specific, which could be
taken as a plan Counter plan
o An alternative to affirmative plan Topicality does not matter
for this There are arguments that say that the counter plan cant be
topical Net-beneficial
o NEEDS to have a specific counter plan text The United States
would do better to take the money and give it to cancer
research
Difference between pf/policy is how the plan is stated Pf- youre
stating a general idea and the benefits of it
o Difference between counter plan/counter advocacyo Advantageso
You run the plan and then the advantages (3 steps)
Significance/Harm Whats stopping it from being harmed And how do
you solve for it *****A LOT LIKE HOW A CONTENTION IS
WRITTEN*****
o Solvency Does the plan solve for the harms? Not all
resolutions require proof of solvency You do NOT have to FULLY
solve for problems in order to solve, as long
as there are benefits
Dissadso Man on an edge of the cliff
If hes standing a mile away from the edge, hes not going to fall
If hes standing on the edge, theres a possibility that he will fall
Plan= push Depends on how far he is from the edge and how big a
push will have to
be
Timeframe= how long will it take Internal link= have to prove
that his fall caused his injuries, and they
werent already there
o How to answer a Dissad
Should be
used in case
7/31/2019 Applying Policy Values to Public Forum
2/2
Look for link turn When they link the argument, is there any way
to turn that into
something better
Link take-out There is no link
Impact turns This is actually good for us
o Topicality Should not be happening in United States, but may
happen sometimes Dual topicality may happen Structure Definition=
why affirmative doesnt meet that definition Reasons to prefer= why
is your definition better Violations= why does it violate that
Reasons to vote Vagueness= Pf ppl get really really vague
When people run a variety of positions Have a specific idea in
mind and STICK with it Make your contention general and your
examples being specific
o The opponents cant get out of over generalizationarguments
o Kritiques Challenge the assumptions about the way you think In
decreasing capitalism, you assume that capitalism is bad or all It
is a criticism of an assumption Saying that we shouldnt look for
other places to colonize because we
have problems at home is a Kritique
You can challenge solvency Ways to answer critique Use crossfire
to make sure what theyre talking about Use your brain Look at
uniqueness
Does it apply specifically to our advocacy or general rule No
alternatives? Attack alternative
o Value debate Standards by which the judge values subsequent
arguments How you measure good access through value premise
For example: Democracy is better than economy- why? Pofo allows
you to bring in how LD and policy run but in a way that is
persuasive to
govt
o Truth-based resolutions
