Difference between revisions of "Theory"
→Interpretation/Violation
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
An example of an interpretation is “Interp: Debaters must not run conditional advocacies” which criticizes the use of [[conditional]] advocacies in the round. | An example of an interpretation is “Interp: Debaters must not run conditional advocacies” which criticizes the use of [[conditional]] advocacies in the round. | ||
Interps for non-[[paragraph theory]] should be constructed with an actor (typically | Interps for non-[[paragraph theory]] should be constructed with an actor (typically “debaters”) and should contain words like “must” instead of “should” or “ought.” | ||
Violations are reasons why your opponent fails to meet your interp. | Violations are reasons why your opponent fails to meet your interp. | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
An example of a violation to the earlier shell is “Violation: Their [x] advocacy is a conditional advocacy.” | An example of a violation to the earlier shell is “Violation: Their [x] advocacy is a conditional advocacy.” | ||
Violations can run from being just “Vio: They do” to screenshots and more detailed explanations. A good way to check violations if you’re unsure of them being legitimate is to check in [[cross-ex]]. | Violations can run from being just “Vio: They do” to screenshots and more detailed explanations. A good way to check violations if you’re unsure of them being legitimate is to check in [[cross-ex]]. | ||
=== Standards === | === Standards === | ||