(1:35)

A: Interpretation If debaters read a ROB argument, they must read at the top of their case
as opposed to the bottom

B: Violation They read their ROB at the ___

C: Standards
1) Strat Skew -The ROB is the highest layer introduce by the aff because it sets up the
framing and weighing of the AC. Reading it at the bottom gives me less time to generate
arguments which uniquely hurts my strat. Strat is key to fairness because imbalances
shift the advantage over to one debater.

2) Clash - The transition from the 1ac and prep is too quick. This incentivizes up layer as
opposed to engaging with the ROB since most of the strat is pre-determined at the
beginning of CX. Clash is key to education because we get more knowledge by engaging
with each other args rather than relying on generics. Clash is also key to fairness because
otherwise the debater with better resources will win most of the time.
D: Voters

1) Fairness
a. Judge has an obligation to vote for the better debater, but they cant decide who
the better debater was if the round was unfair.
b. Fairness constrains education, debate is a competitive event if the round is unfair
then this forces discussion away from substance to theory which is worse because
we only have 2 months to debate the topic whereas we can always talk about
theory.
2) Education
a. The reason why schools fund debate
b. What we take away from the activity

Drop the debater

1) Deterrence Ultimate punishment forces them to re-think their approach next time
2) Dropping the Arg doesnt make sense It just means they accept the trade-offs but dont
accept the consequences.
3) Jurisdiction Absent normative impacts, if I win my interp is net-better in this round
then the judge must drop the other debater specific to this round.
Theory is an issue of Competing Interps
1) Competing interps sets up the best norm because we choose between two competing
ideals rather than just establishing a vague brightline
 2) Reasonability invites arbitrary judge intervention which is uniquely bad because it
compounds variables outside the control of the debater. Wins should be awarded to the
better debater.
No RVIs
1) RVIs incentivize more not less theory debates because debaters can bait theory in order
to collapse down to it. This is also empirically verified, ever since RVIs were created
there hasnt been any less theory which means no impact to RVIs good.

2) Make no Logical sense Debaters have the obligation to answer back args. You
should be able to answer back frivolous theory claims on your own, there is no strat skew
here it just means that you should be more efficient instead.