New Horizons PF Tournament Nov blitz
2019 — Santo Domingo, DO
PF Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideHello debaters,
I am currently a 2nd year Medical Student. I've been actively participating in Model UN, Public Forum, and Lincoln Douglas for 4 years; I'm currently coaching and judging Public Forum. Likewise, I like to think of debate as an empowering experience for both the debaters and the judges, so be respectful to the activity we all love.
I love clashes between arguments; boil down your arguments and tell me explicitly why you won the round and on which terms. Explain and analyze every piece of information even though I might already know what you're talking about. I deeply enjoy the use of fallacies while refuting evidence. I'm most likely to vote for you if your argument is wrapped around the extensive use of statistics and logic. Furthermore, I don't mind spreading, but I prefer if you could read at a leveled speed and tone; the debate is not about throwing arguments at my face, but about connecting them to the resolution at hand.
I understand the frustration of debaters when they encounter biased judges, this is why I completely place my beliefs aside; feel free to run any argument you like, at the end of the day the ballot doesn't depend on your beliefs, but on how you run your arguments and apply your knowledge into the round. I don't like Ks, I think they take away from the value of Public Forum, nevertheless, I will flow them (I just might not buy them). Likewise, I like to say I'm tech> truth, but if the tech is ridiculous, I'm not buying it.
Specifics on speeches:
1. I weigh the round on the established framework and how the speakers appeal to it.
2. All impacts should be warranted, linked, and with In-text citations to be valuable in my ballot.
3. All forms of refutation are good with me as long as they are sustained with factual evidence and quantification
4. Arguments dropped in the summary will not be taken into consideration in my ballot.
5. The Summary should be a weighing machine in the round, weighing done only in the final focus will not be considered in the round.
6. I am very flexible when it comes to final focus, so just tell me why you won, and you should be good to go.
General:
1. CXs can be as aggressive as you want but don't cross the line. Being disrespectful will have effects on your speaker points. (pls make it interesting for me)
2. Time yourself
3. If you are asked for evidence try to show it quickly. (I'll prefer if you say you can't find it, instead of spending 5 mins of the round looking for it)
4. Personal insults, projections against debaters, intentional misgendering, discrimination, or pettiness will be penalized by taking speaker points off (and you'll probably lose the round).
5. Be on time to the round.
6. I don't flow CXs, but I do take them into consideration for weighing my ballot.
7. Please don't add me to email chains or links. Just share the evidence in the round, and I'll be happy.
8. As I said, I've been debating for a long time, so don't try to create PF rules, I know them.
Have fun, debate is a wonderful experience!
(+1 speaker point if you make a Friends or TikTok reference)
Arturo Féliz-Camilo
I studied and practice law, hold two law degrees and teach History. I'm familiar and like the economic/social/historical arguments. I've been coaching (mostly PF) since 2013 for New Horizons Bilingual School in the Dominican Republic.
I love debate, and the strategy game. I love to see a good clash of ideas and interesting/novel analysis. I'll buy any argument as long as you link, warrant, and support it with relevant evidence. Still, I think some arguments are just in bad taste. Allow me to further clarify this point. I am not going to buy any argument just because "there's a card". That's not enough for me. You have to persuade me, you have to warrant your claims.
I believe communication is key. If I can't understand it due to speed, I won't flow it. I won't ask you to slow down. I almost never intervene. Debate should not be about brute force your opponents into submission, but about a clash of ideas.
I really enjoy a civil CX. Ask for evidence if you must, but don't make the round an evidence match. If you call for evidence I hope you're planning to do something with it. I listen to CX but won't flow it. I'll note cool stuff in the hopes it makes it into your speech. I almost never review evidence, unless there's a claim by one of the teams, and then I must. I'll go with what's in my flow. I do admit that having the cases help me flow, but I mostly flow what you read.
It's ok to offer an off-time roadmap, just don't take a minute doing so. Quickly give it and move on. Don't ask. Just do it.
Once more. Explain, analyze, and warrant your case, don’t just read it. Weigh, impact, link, extend, boil down, crystallize. Feel free to sign-post/roadmap. Absent a framework and weighing I'll go with what stands in the end. Don't bring new arguments to summary. I won't flow them. Don't bring new arguments to final focus. I won't flow it.
I'm not in love with Ks or Theory. Run them at your own risk. I like to think that we should debate under the agreed upon rules. I will buy arguments on technical aspects of PF, as a matter of order and fairness. I think too many debaters are running disclosure in a dishonest way. All that said, I will buy anything that makes sense, including abusive behavior, bad faith misgendering, and anti-violence. I am not absolutely closed to theory, but I'll usually only buy it if it's run in good faith, and not as a strategy to win a round.
Pettiness will not win me over, but you gotta stand your ground. Sassiness is awesome, but the line between the two is just so thin. You want to win your round? Be smart, creative, fun, thoughtful, and strategic. Outweigh, outsmart, outperform, outclass your opponent.
If at the end of the round you want me to explain how I gave or not gave you the ballot, I will absolutely do it in good faith, but I will not debate you, or change my mind. Once I start disclosing, the ballot is already in, so trying to persuade me at that point is not productive.
Add me to your evidence chain arturo@arturofeliz.com
I was a Public Forum debater for 4 years during high school in the Dominican Republic, during which I became the International TOC 2018 Champion. Currently, I am a debate coach for several Dominican schools.
In general, I judge rounds based on argumentation and flow. You are allowed to speak as fast as you want, as long as you are understandable while doing so, with the caveat that I am exceptionally bad at understanding spreading. I am pretty knowledgeable in debate jargon, so don't be afraid to get technical. Good teamwork and speaking skills are appreciated, as well.
In the end, my decision will probably boil down to the best use of arguments and impacts in the round (though this is TBD for specific rounds). Be sure to extend your arguments into summary AND final focus if you want me to include them in my decision process – too many teams have lost rounds simply because they drop huge arguments in the later speeches. Anything mentioned in crossfire that is NOT mentioned in a future speech is not going to be factored into my decision.
Signposting is very important so that I can maintain a good understanding of what you are responding to. I can usually figure out what you are talking about, but it's best to use this technique to avoid confusion. The same goes for general organization – try to keep a good order so I can flow with you, not against you. If you want to use pre-speech roadmaps, the decision to use them or not is up to you.
My biggest debate pet peeves are extensions through ink. If you do not frontline your arguments, you are not winning that argument, no matter how short or nonsensical their response was. For second-speaking teams, I'd rather they do their frontlining in their rebuttal. This gives the first-speaking team a fairer chance to provide proper defense in summary.
This should go without saying, but you need to be thorough during rebuttal in shutting down their WHOLE speech. Any new responses you bring up in summary, grand cross, or final focus that were not present in rebuttal (unless they are frontlines, of course) will not be factored into my decision. Also, if there is direct evidence or argument clash, you need to actually bring something new to the table. Analyze and compare evidence or arguments, don't just say what your own argument or evidence says; otherwise, the argument will be a wash and I will not factor it in my decision.
Be sure to weigh your impacts with your opponents' so the calculus doesn't fall under my (likely biased) burden. I cannot stress this point enough: so many rounds have been lost simply because I had to be the one doing the impact calculus. So, be clear on why and how your impact outweighs your opponents'. However, before considering any impact weighing, make sure you actually access those impacts. There is no use comparing an impact that was shut down in rebuttal or summary. Additionally, keeping a clear, concise narrative and explaining your logic and link chain throughout the debate is probably the most important thing you need to do in the later speeches.
I am very unfamiliar with Ks and Theory, so if you are inclined to use them, be very clear on them. The same goes for convoluted or extremely unique arguments. However, if your argument is purposefully confusing, as to disorient the opposing team, you're not doing a great job with your speech. If I'm unable to understand your point or central argument, you are unlikely to win the round.
Remember: debate is about having fun!
Hello!
A little background about me... I was a Public Forum Debate Coach until recently, and was a PF debater myself.
On to preferences..
If you present an argument/statistic, make sure you have evidence to back it up. Any evidence that is asked I will also ask to see. If there is some information that seems wrong to me, or manipulated, I will ask for it and if it turns out to be foul play you will automatically lose the round. Make sure all evidence is warranted. I weigh numbers more than I do words. Also, I discourage link chains. (Having to prove 3+ links to get to your impact.)
Clear and fast-paced speeches are my preference. However do not spread, I will not flow.
During crossfires, I like civil interactions between teams. Though please keep it interesting. Be sassy and clever, but not abusive. Make me laugh and I'll give you 2 extra speaker points. Also in Grand-cross, both partners should speak. Everyone should be taking their own time and staying within the speaking times.
If an argument or impact is not mentioned in Summary I consider it dropped. Period. If it is mentioned in summary but not carried through to final focus, i also consider it dropped. No new arguments will be accepted after rebuttal.
Frameworks are a must. If you don't do Framework weighing/comparisons in rebuttal and/or summary adequately i will choose my own. Make sure your framework is clear to me. Impact calculus(i.e. probability, magnitude, scope, timeframe, impact short circuiting, reversibility, etc.) is ESSENTIAL in summary and final focus. Tell me what you win and why you win it, and why you win it better than the opposing team does.
USE TAGLINES, in every speech. No exception. Make sure your speeches are organized.
I love a good argument/impact turn, pointing out non-uniqueness, slick stuff like that.
Do NOT leave time in a speech. Do NOT go over your time. I will keep your time; however, please do so as well. If you keep talking past your time and do not stop when I ask you to, I will be decreasing your speaker points significantly.
That's about it, if you have any questions or concerns I'll be happy to briefly answer them before the round begins.
Most importantly, have fun!
María Jimenez
I studied and practice law. I'm familiar and like the economic/social/historical arguments. I've been coaching PF since 2017 for New Horizons Bilingual School in the Dominican Republic.
I love debate, and the strategy game. I love to see a good clash of ideas and interesting/novel analysis. I'll buy any argument as long as you link, warrant, and support it with relevant evidence. Still, I think some arguments are just in bad taste.
I believe communication is key. If I can't understand it due to speed, I won't flow it. I won't ask you to slow down. I almost never intervene. Debate should not be about brute force your opponents into submission, but about a clash of ideas.
I really enjoy a civil CX. Ask for evidence if you must, but don't make the round an evidence match. If you call for evidence I hope you're planning to do something with it. I hear CX but won't flow it. I'll note cool stuff in the hopes it makes it into your speech.
Explain, analyze, and warrant your case, don’t just read it. Weigh, impact, link, extend, boil down, crystallize. Feel free to sign-post/roadmap. Absent a framework and weighing I'll go with what stands in the end.
I'm not in love with Ks or Theory. Run them at your own risk. I like to think that we should debate under the agreed upon rules. I will buy arguments on technical aspects of PF, as a matter of order and fairness. I think too many debaters are running disclosure in a dishonest way. All that said, I will buy anything that makes sense, including abusive behavior, bad faith misgendering, and anti-violence.
Pettiness will not win me over, but you gotta stand your ground. Sassiness is awesome, but the line between the two is just so thin.
You want to win your round? Be smart, creative, fun, thoughtful, and strategic. Outweigh, outsmart, outperform, outclass your opponent.
email: mariaalexandrajimenezcano@gmail.com
Hellooo! I am an ex a public forum debate and am currently in med school! I have quite a bit of debate experience (debated for 4 years) and now I coach PF.
I would really appreciate that you guys use technical debate terms/jargon throughout the round. I'll try to include as many details as possible but if you have any other questions feel free to ask. Remember the most important thing is that you try your best and have fun!!
- I can keep up with a pretty fast pace just make sure its understandable, but slow down when reading your impacts or numbers so I can get them all down.
- In your rebuttal I really would prefer a line by line approach but if you don't it wont hurt you.
- For summary please make sure to use impact calculus and explain to me why they apply to each individual issue. Make sure you really summarize for me what happened in the round but please don't just make it another rebuttal that'll make your speaks lower...
- On that same note do not mention any arguments in final focus that you didn't extend through summary. If I hear something not mentioned in summary in final focus, i'll just stop flowing.
- In final focus, same thing as summary don't just refute everything again. This your chance to really grab my attention and tell me why your'e winning. Make it priority to get all the voting issues across. Flat out tell me what they are and how you won them.
- On evidence, I really don't care if you ask for it but if you ask for a new piece every 5 secs i'll probably get annoyed and lower your speaks. With that being said, if you debate over a card for a while i'll ask for it at the end and use that for my decision.
- I will ALWAYS keep time, but do as well try your best to NOT leave more than or go over 3 seconds. In cx, if you go over time just finish your sentence (briefly) don't waste time by asking me.
- I love a fiery cx but if you're rude you'll lose speakers, and if you're just plain disrespectful ( racist/homophobic/xenophobic etc.) you're losing the round.
- If you make me laugh, bring me coffee, or reference Grey's Anatomy your speaker points will be boosted:)
Goodluck!
I was a PF debater and MUNer throughout my highschool career, and am now a debate coach and studying business.
I appreciate a very technical debate; i.e. smart FWs, lots of impact calculus, clear voting issues, fallacies, jargon, and weighing.
Speak up and enunciate, I think it's kind of important that I can actually understand what you're saying during a round.
Off-time road maps are okay and encouraged. In RB try to go line-by-line if it suits you, and be smart about your refutation. Arguments not mentioned in summary I assume are dropped. FF should very clearly explain to me why you win each clashing point. Always remember your signposting.
Be mindful of your performance and charisma (they're very important to me), and have fun. Do not be rude at any point. If your speech time ends in the middle of a sentence, it's fine for you to finish it (just a few words).
All arguments should be backed by evidence and it should be presented quickly if called. I'll probably want to see it. Do NOT have a debate or argue with your opponents when calling cards.
I refrain from inferring on any arguments and will only give points for what you explicitly state (as tabula rasa as possible). I will not refute, assume, clarify, or weigh for you.
Keep track of your own time at all points. Try not to leave any time in your speeches.
Please do contact me at veratolari03@gmail.com if you have any questions!