Novice Packet

As per the KSCA recommendation, this year the Olathe North invitational will be using the NDCA evidence packet for the novice division. All entries competing in novice will be constrained to the following set of evidence. Here are some general guidelines... (quoting Eric Skoglund bc this was thorough and apparently there was confusion)

1) The only evidence read in a novice round should be from the packet. Re-highlighting the card is cool; re-tagging the card is great as long as thesis is unchanged; going back to the source and cutting in additional text is not. 2) Aff plan texts should be (at least functionally, and perhaps textually) identical to what is presented in the packet. In some regions there is flexibility in this to avoid lay judges voting neg on vagueness / "my judge clinic said plans have planks" every round. 3) The only advantage areas aff cases should use are the ones in the packet. Creating an inherency and/or solvency contention from existing cards is fine, but inventing a totally new advantage, even with existing evidence, is not. 4) Negative teams should not read carded argumentation that is not in the packet. Norms vary on non-carded off-case positions (I don't believe, for instance, that novices ought to be throwing ASPEC around in September, but I wouldn't go complain to a host if you did). 5) As with aff advantages, even if you can wrangle some cards into a new disadvantage, you should not. Arguments should remain as they are titled in the packet. As with aff cases, you are free to modify the 1NC shell by replacing parts with other packet evidence as long as the thesis is the same. 6) The general principle: it's a novice debate round. Generally, the more you're trying to play "gotcha" and win rounds as opposed to creating an environment where students are learning skills and having a good experience, the less likely that what you're doing is fair.

Let me know if you have any other questions.