I think I'm going to start employing policy debate's stock issues paradigm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_issues)

I think I'm going to start employing policy debate's stock issues paradigm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_issues) to all proposals I see on HN. So, with that: Solvency: Flow that through for the aff, no argument. Harms: Affirmative fails to illustrate any harms inherent in the status quo. The plan should be thrown out on these grounds alone. Inherency: Affirmative only proposes a semantic clarification to a sub genre of internet message boards; no actual policy change is necessary to implement this. Affirmative plan does not demonstrate that status quo cannot solve the unspecified harms on its own. Flow this negative. Topicality: No argument, flow aff. Significance: Without any harms, the aff cannot claim any significance to their plan. Flow this negative.