The reason for not accepting new arguments in the 2NC is simple: It is abusive to the AFF to have to respond to new stuff while also responding to the arguments in the 1NR, in the 1AR.
The 2NC is a constructive, and thus, it should be perfectly legitimate for the NEG to make as many new arguments as they want.
New arguments in the 2NC can be a waste of valuable speech time, if the AFF has good responses which the NEG hasn't anticipated, when the time could be used to develop winnable arguments.
Jenny has found that 2Nc Alert has not only reduced the level of truancy at Burnage High School, but has also made a significant difference to her working day.
With the Reporting facility that is incorporated into the 2Nc Alert System, I can now send parents a text message and prove that it has been delivered to the parent’s handset.
Ian Fenn, is delighted with the difference that the 2Nc Alert System has made to Burnage High School, saying: “The use of text messaging to tell parents that their child is absent from school is such a novel use of technology that has worked so well for us at Burnage High School.
www.2ncalert.com /burnage.html (778 words)
Can I use new arguments in the 2NC?(Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-28)
Also avoid hurting yourself by contradiction and dropping arguments that you won’t be able to use in the rebuttals.
In some areas judges won’t even listen to new evidence in the 2NC so it is a good idea to have a file or 2 that says that they are legal and that they bring the neg to equal ground with the affirmative team.
So don’t be afraid of using them just make sure you use them correctly and be prepare to here the affirmative team complain of your injustices to them.
The 2Nc Alert Attendance and Behaviour Management System enables you to reduce the amount of staff time spent on maintaining attendance and behaviour through communication via mobile messaging
Burnage High School Embrace the 2Nc Alert System
Burnage High School in Manchester have embraced all aspects of the Fingershield 2Nc Alert System, which has had such a positive impact on all aspects of school life.
The second negative constructive (2NC) is the second speech given by the negative team, the fourth speech in the round, given by the second negative speaker.
The first negative rebuttal (1NR) is the third speech given by the negative team, the fifth speech in the round, given by the first negative speaker.
It can often start prepping during the 2AC, and always has whatever prep time is taken for the 2NC, the 2NC, and the cross-examination of the 2NC to prepare (after cross-examining the 2AC).
Although the two speeches are divided by a 3-minute cross-examination of the 2NC, they are given back to back without the interruption of an affirmative speech.
Because the 1NR has the ability to answer arguments which were dropped by the 2NC, the cross-examination of the 2NC will generally not emphasize dropped arguments.
Although the phenomenon of "splitting the block" may suggest that the 2NC and the 1NR are equall, community norms held by some dictate that some arguments must be taken by the 2NC (e.g.
You could argue that the 2NC is exactly what it's name is: a negative constructive speech, so bringing up new arguments would be allowed.
The fairness of new arg's in the 2NC is that the 1AR can Turn Disads and then the Neg has to waste their precious 1NR time on either punting the DA or answering everything.
New arg's in the 2NC is not theoretically unfair though it might be strategically un-sound.
In the case of the 2NC saints, we will not be taking a Census to determine when the 12,001th person in each tribe is reached.
If a 2NC king without a completed water baptism, is DFD then when he returns and is re-baptised, he becomes what anyone else would become.
The angels will arrange that the first 144,000 2NC saints are put into one or other of the 12 tribes, moving candidates to non full tribes when necessary to ensure first come first served.
This speech is the negatives opportunity to attack affirmative positions, defend negative positions, and is the last chance the negative will have to present any new arguments.
The 2NC and 1NR (the next speech) should cover different issues, this is called DIVISION OF LABOR.
This is the first rebuttal in the round and is the speech when this negative speaker addresses the issues his partner did not cover in the 2NC, the speaker attacks affirmative speeches and defends negative positions.
The basic structure of a policy debate, using the time limits used in most states for high school policy debate, is as follows:
Note that the negative team gets to present two speeches in a row (2NC and 1NR) while the affirmative team has the advantage of presenting both the very first and the very last speech.
This is an artifact of policy debate's attempt to model a court of law in which the prosecution would get to speak both first and last; one could just as easily reverse the order of the last four speeches (e.g.
to avoid simply repeating the arguments made by the 2NC.
For this reason, it is common for the 1NR to address the
www.osi.hu /debate/messag34.htm (773 words)
new2n(Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-28)
Is this (arguing that the 2nc cannot present new arguments) an "unfair" argument.
--------i guess the bottom line for me, if you had me as a judge, is, i don't really mind new arguments in the 2nc--the 1ar can answer them just as easily as 2nc extensions.
you can argue that its unfair because the 1ar can't make new arguments (although i think almost any judge would permit the 1ar to respond to new 2nc arguments--otherwise, the aff.
The 2nc should “back flow” for the 1nc during the cross(this means that the 2nc should make another copy of their flows of all the 1nc arguments for their partners to use during the rest of the debate)
The 2nc should think about what arguments they want to take in the block
The 2nc should decide what they want to take in the block and what the 1nr should take.
Second, the negative team has two speeches in a row: the first negative rebuttal (1NR) immediately follows the second negative constructive (2NC).
For example, affirmative teams will sometimes go "inside-outside" so that one person (usually the weaker member) gives the 1AC and the 2AR, while the other (stronger) debater gives the 2AC and the 1AR.
The person who does the cross-examining is the person who will not be giving the next speech for his side.