25
edits
Difference between revisions of "Granada Hills AS (Ayush Saha)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
Ayush Saha (talk | contribs) m |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Hi everybody! My name is Ayush and I debated for Granada Hills Charter for 3 years. I did circuit for 1 year and I want to give back to the community. I was mainly a phil and tricks debater on the west coast lmao and I enjoyed trolling | Hi everybody! My name is Ayush and I debated for Granada Hills Charter for 3 years. I did circuit for 1 year and I want to give back to the community. I was mainly a phil and tricks debater on the west coast lmao and I enjoyed trolling larpers. Here is some of the stuff I read! Also if you wanna be a trick debater on the west coast contact me. I'll help you with reverse preffing or something [/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection <nowiki>[email protected]</nowiki>] | ||
I will post all my stuff when the season ends. There is a bunch of juicy stuff in here. | I will post all my stuff when the season ends. There is a bunch of juicy stuff in here. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
<big>AFF</big> | <big>AFF</big> | ||
[[Media:JF-ILAW AC.docx|JF-ILAW AC.docx]] Hahaha ILAW. Such a funny aff, I read this for most of jan feb. Read it all of peninsula and most of HWL. Really funny aff and the UV is stacked with hella args. Usually I don't collapse to ILAW in the 2ar, but if I do, I would read epistemic modesty and say the case outweighs b/c violations are infinitely bad- it's in the 1ar stuff. This aff also has hella skep triggers and some funny warrants. It worked well but not as well as I hoped but I'm also on the west coast so it's a rip. 1AR stuff was written by me. Credit to Ryan Factora from West Ranch for the original aff. | [[Media:JF-ILAW AC.docx|JF-ILAW AC.docx]] Hahaha ILAW. Such a funny aff, I read this for most of jan feb. Read it all of peninsula and most of HWL. Really funny aff and the UV is stacked with hella args. Usually I don't collapse to ILAW in the 2ar, but if I do, I would read epistemic modesty and say the case outweighs b/c violations are infinitely bad- it's in the 1ar stuff. This aff also has hella skep triggers and some funny warrants. It worked well but not as well as I hoped but I'm also on the west coast so it's a rip. 1AR stuff was written by me. Credit to Ryan Factora from West Ranch for the original aff. | ||
[[Media:JF-NCM AC.docx|JF-NCM AC.docx]]I read this 2 rounds. once was in doubles of Jack Howe (it was an older more confusing version, Won on the flow but got out ethos rip). This version uploaded is what I read R6 of HWL. Only broke it once, but it's so funny. It interacts well with most NC's and like the analytic warrants are comedy. I got original aff from Perry from Heritage, but I wrote out the analytic warrants and stuff and ordering. Also same UV as the ILAW aff. I won that round on the K-links spike (LOL)and a presumption trigger (if contradictions are good, that means you can't use it as a sign of falsity in a theory, so the aff and the k are true so it triggers presumption vote aff) SO GOOD. This was one of my favorite aff'. 1AR stuff was written by me | [[Media:JF-NCM AC.docx|JF-NCM AC.docx]]I read this 2 rounds. once was in doubles of Jack Howe (it was an older more confusing version, Won on the flow but got out ethos rip). This version uploaded is what I read R6 of HWL. Only broke it once, but it's so funny. It interacts well with most NC's and like the analytic warrants are comedy. I got original aff from Perry from Heritage, but I wrote out the analytic warrants and stuff and ordering. Also same UV as the ILAW aff. I won that round on the K-links spike (LOL)and a presumption trigger (if contradictions are good, that means you can't use it as a sign of falsity in a theory, so the aff and the k are true so it triggers presumption vote aff) SO GOOD. This was one of my favorite aff'. 1AR stuff was written by me | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<big>NEG</big> | <big>NEG</big> | ||
[[Media:JF-Subjective Idealism NC.docx|JF-Subjective Idealism NC.docx]] This was by far my favorite NC to read. I'm 8-1 with this NC (low-key should be 9-0 but oh well) It can and will work on any topic. It's just so obscure people don't know how to respond to it. It will also respond to non-T aff. The trick with this NC is to pair it with truth testing, but if you are losing that flow, the 2NR overview is written out so that you can go for it as an epistemology indict that negates absent a ROTB b/c 10/10 they conceded epistemology first MUAHAHAHA. If you do decide to read this NC, I highly suggest you read the Ellis article in the NC because you wanna be able to explain this in cross. It was my trap card against any aff. Use it responsibly haha. | [[Media:JF-Subjective Idealism NC.docx|JF-Subjective Idealism NC.docx]] This was by far my favorite NC to read. I'm 8-1 with this NC (low-key should be 9-0 but oh well) It can and will work on any topic. It's just so obscure people don't know how to respond to it. It will also respond to non-T aff. The trick with this NC is to pair it with truth testing, but if you are losing that flow, the 2NR overview is written out so that you can go for it as an epistemology indict that negates absent a ROTB b/c 10/10 they conceded epistemology first MUAHAHAHA. If you do decide to read this NC, I highly suggest you read the Ellis article in the NC because you wanna be able to explain this in cross. It was my trap card against any aff. Use it responsibly haha. | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
[[Media:JF-Baudrillard K.docx|JF-Baudrillard K.docx]] LOL Baudy skep, went for it one time and won on it against a reparations aff | [[Media:JF-Baudrillard K.docx|JF-Baudrillard K.docx]] LOL Baudy skep, went for it one time and won on it against a reparations aff | ||