Saw the term card post. I know the convenors say it's 'silly-serious' but I think THW legalise assassination markets for war criminals might genuinely be the best motion on the card — it forces Prop to defend an actual mechanism instead of vibes about justice. Prove me wrong before Thursday.
The interesting Opposition line isn't moral squeamishness, it's incentives — you're creating a price signal that rewards accusation inflation. Who verifies 'war criminal' status, and what happens to due process when there's a bounty pending?
It's a great motion until you hit the definitional debate. If Prop defines 'war criminal' as 'convicted by the ICC' the market is tiny and the debate dies. Definition is doing ALL the work here.
As someone who'll probably end up judging this: please, everyone, spend prep on the mechanism and not on Hague trivia. The room that debates incentives will be a joy; the room that lists warlords will not.