Posts filed under: The Meta

A Concluding Thought on Jury Nullification and Plans – Bob Overing

By Bob Overing 1 – S’quo or No I watched an octas debate at the Glenbrooks this year between Ollie Sussman from Cambridge Rindge and Latin and Neal Kapoor from Lake Highland Prep on the jury nullification topic and the […]

Continue Reading →

Recovering the Role of the Ballot

Premier Debate co-Director Bob Overing has recently released a copy of the paper he presented at the 2015 Alta Conference on Argumentation. He argues for a view similar to ethical modesty in LD framework debates but applied to the “role of the […]

Continue Reading →

Is disclosure theory different?

In this edition of The Meta, Bob considers and rejects arguments for a paradigmatic stance against disclosure theory.

Continue Reading →

In Defense of Inclusion by John Scoggin and Bob Overing

John and Bob employ arguments for pragmatics and argumentative inclusion in response to Nebel and Branse.

Continue Reading →

On All-Encompassing Debate Worldviews

In this short post, Bob muses on the meaning of debate.

Continue Reading →

On Theory Internal Links

Bob says internal links from common theory standards to common voters are self-evident, needing no justification.

Continue Reading →

Expanding the Scope of Intuitions by Bob Overing

Bob discusses how we might use intuitions in LD theory debates.

Continue Reading →

Ethical Modesty Part 3 by Bob Overing and Adam Bistagne

This time, Bob and Adam argue that judges should adopt EM as a paradigmatic default.

Continue Reading →

Theory Spikes, Meta-Theory and Embedded Clash by Bob Overing

Theory Spikes, Meta-Theory and Embedded Clash: A Case Study of Kinkaid TG v Brentwood JL

Continue Reading →

Substantive/Structural Fairness by Bob Overing and John Scoggin

In this edition, Bob and John add some clarity to the substantive/structural fairness divide.

Continue Reading →