How should I negate the resolution

How should I negate the resolution: Standards of professionalism should be valued above free expression on social networking sites.
What should my value and criterion be?

Simple:

- How do you rate professionalism

- It creates elitism

At 11/5/2009 1:57:21 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Simple:

- How do you rate professionalism

- It creates elitism

"how do you rate professionalism"<- how can that be a value
values are things like justice, goodness, social stability,

"It creates elitism" <- how would this be a criterion

At 11/5/2009 1:53:58 PM, letoyajackson wrote:
How should I negate the resolution: Standards of professionalism should be valued above free expression on social networking sites.
What should my value and criterion be?

From my understanding the value is best drawn from the resolution itself. You may value individualism in negating 'professionalism' which may be seen as common standard. You achieve this, the criterion, through language usage.

What I generally do in LD style debates is think of arguments and then assign a value to them. It's a lot easier to decide what you're arguing and tie it together than limit your chances from the start.

At 11/5/2009 1:53:58 PM, letoyajackson wrote:
How should I negate the resolution: Standards of professionalism should be valued above free expression on social networking sites.
What should my value and criterion be?

UIL is fail.

Affirmation is censorship. Just argue that censorship creates fear in the posters from being blocked and it necessarily creates either an arbitrary system where a mod has unlimited (abusable) power or some fixed filter that is easily avoided. Impracticality is a route.
The other is freedom of expression. LIBERTY.