First of all, sorry for taking so long.
1. S&E does not mean you just talk about the big picture, it means that you lay down the framework for every argument you will have in the 1NC, instead of splitting them up between the 2 constructives. "Laying the framework" usually just means you explain the argument in it's simplest form -- Link, brink, and impact, although you want to focus on the first two in the 1NC, because you will have plenty of time to really flesh out a bunch of impacts later in the 2NC and 1NR.
What I meant by big picture is that a lot of articles and people describing the 1NC in S&E just say, "1NC: Lays the framework for every major argument in the round" The big picture was that they just say what they do, not how. The second sentence was what I was looking for. Thanks! This whole question was about the details of S&E.
2. Seeing as though you lay out all (or most of, in some cases) arguments in the 1NC, they will be able to respond to all the arguments in the 2AC unless you add a few in the 2NC. Here
is a really helpful article and S&E.
What I meant here is if the 2A gets up and responds to the argument, then says, "Now the Negative is probably going to say later that..."
I read that article in another thread, so I'm familiar with it.
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2012-13
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2013-14
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2014-15
Barndt/Blacklock | Arete, R10 | 2015-16
Barndt/Cuddeback | R10 | 2016-17
Barndt/Wolf | SALT, R10 | 2017-18
I'm inclined to think like Andrew does.