K answers produced by the multitude

In a few of the podcasts I have mentioned that one of the reasons the K is so successful is that over the years people have spent a ton of time refining their evidence/arguments so that now a K debater going for the cap K has the best evidence on each issue produced by thousands of hours of college and high school debaters working (in isolation but ultimately cooperatively) on their own files.

Bill and I are going to attempt to replicate a similar process this summer and produce answers to some common K arguments that incorporate the best possible evidence for each issue. Our goal is not to try and eradicate the K by making answers so good its impossible to win on it, but to foster better debates by reducing the disparity in quality between neg evidence and aff answers.

So why are we telling you this? Well in order for this process to be truly effective it will require a lot of input from the masses. What we hope will happen is that people will contribute by sending along cards, cites, or journal articles they have been unable to access to provide a basis for us/our lab kids in conducting our research.

To that effect i have created a seperate email account: deathtothek@gmail.com . I tried to get twofatguysresearchkanswers but that had already been taken.

So if you have something to contribute- a card, a cite you found, anything, just email it to deathtothek@gmail.com

At least for the initial wave it looks like the arguments we will be working on are

-the prolif k

-positive peace



-fem ir

-language based k’s of security

-generic K shenanigans liek no value to life, epistemology, ontology, methodology, reps first, root cause, predictions fail etc

So why should you contribute to this?

I think Bill and I see things the same way in that we don’t really believe that debate is made better by people running from clash. When someone has a really good card, it forces everyone they debate to up their game and deal with it. When good cards are read in a debate, that debate will be better than had the same debaters read bad cards. In this way the quality of debates will be better post this project than they were before hand (in our opinions).

How should we email things?

Emails should follow a basic formula. In the subject list broadly whatever you are sending, such as “root cause answers” or if you are sending multiple things list them all. Bill and I will each be working on different things so dividing up the subjects in your email will help us identify which emails we need to read/look at.

It would be great if you attached things in word documents with the subject as the title, so if you were sending cards on 5 issues, have 5 word documents one for each issue so that we can download/organize them easily.

If you have cites you want us to track down, especially if it was a hard to find source that you didn’t have at your library, send those along as well because between the 3 university libraries we will have access to there is a good chance we can get our hands on them.

If you are a lab leader and you would also like to participate with your lab research group please send me an email to scott@the3nr.com

Questions- post in comments please.

2 thoughts on “K answers produced by the multitude

  1. Suggestion

    I dunno if you are correct in your assertion that teams who read K's are exposed to the best evidence on each of these issues, perhaps do it for both the k and the answers? Just my 2 cents but I feel like this will be very useful, and would like to see both sides benefit.

  2. Rick

    Batterman's new nickname should be Bosserman and maybe Roy can think of the nickname for Scott, casue he hasn't posted anything on here since Peshi was in Junior High.

Comments are closed.