Amazingly, I haven't posted a single thing about debate, yet somewhow it wormed itself to the first word on my blog's name. So I thought I ought to post something debate-related. Last night at club, we discussed Counter plans. (My abv. for them will be CP) Being the person I am, I'm going to talk about CPs!!
Here are the things a Negative team must do in order to properly run a counter plan.
1. The negative team must be non-topical
2. They must solve the harms of the Affirmative team's case
3. They will have prima facie, or the burden of proof
4. It cannot co-exist with the Affirmative team's plan
5. Must have the same Inherency
6. Have a different plan accomplishing the same goal
When you are going Affirmative against a case you....
1. Prove the Negative team is topical
2. Prove that they are co-existing
3. Prove you are solving the harms better than the Negative team is
After our coach had stuffed us full with all of this delightful information, we had practice rounds; each team had a chance to go write a CP against another team and a chance to defend a counter plan against their case. My conclusion about CPs? I will most likely never run one, however interesting they appear.