Condo Good- 2NC

Short- Kritik
First, our counter interpretation--> the negative is
allowed one conditional test of the affirmatives method
or policy.
And, the affirmative should have specified no negative
conditionality in the 1AC- this interp solves all their
offense as well as creating a community norm. Reading
condo in the 2AC allows them to skew the neg block and
starts the debate in the 2AC, mooting 1NC offense.
Reasons to prefer:
1. Neg flex- the aff gets first and last speeches as well
as unlimited prep, neg needs to have as many
options to check back this- conditionality allows us to
test the aff from a multiplicity of options, like the aff
has before the round.
2. Real world- multiple options are proposed in every
policy solution- you should be able to defend your
policy versus a multiplicity of counter-solutions- this
means we control the I/L to educational questions.
3. Critical thinking- testing the affs method is
important to interrogation of the justifications and
rationale behind the aff, otherwise we allow failures
to replicate indefinitely, making the affs education
irrelevant. Condo forces the aff to make strategic
decisions on these positions
[AT: Aff standards]
Evaluate round through reasonability- that means if we
win one standard thats enough to err neg on theory.
Competing interps forces judge intervention to which
interp they like best- that kills education and fairness.
Drop the argument not the team- voting for this enforces
bad, uncreative debate, that incentives teams going for
theory every time, killing substance.

Long