Don’t evaluate MG theory- A-priori: The unquestioned notion that theory is a priori is bad – it leads to the proliferation of unwarranted theory shells, which isn’t educational since it’s just spitting out the same taglines as fast as you can. This kills topic education and portable skills- Double bind: the PMR gets golden answers to everything the MO says – either the judge doesn’t intervene and AFF wins every time, or their interp forces judge intervention – this makes it impossible to evaluate fairly, so don’t evaluate it Reasonability- Definition: Any DA or counter-standard on theory the PMR drops means you vote neg – we give a definition, which solves their only offense against reasonability (judge intervention)- Checks PMR abuse: This checks back against the fact that we don’t have any responses to the PMR – theoretically, if we had another speech, we could use impact calculus to make a single dropped argument outweigh the shell- Chills Abuse: This is key to discourage MG theory unless it’s necessary, which is good because it detracts from substantive debate