Last changed on
Sat February 3, 2024 at 12:25 PM EDT
Harbor Teacher Preparation Academy '21
UC Berkeley '25
she/her, lh.ny.57@gmail.com
Pref--I am a fairly new judge for LD so please slow down on theory/ dense arguments
-Lax with prep but don't steal time sending out docs
-IF it's NOT ON THE FLOW ur args are a blow
-don't be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc or you lose period
-tech > truth
Anyways.....
I have been in policy debate for all 4 years of my high-school career. I competed in the Urban Debate Leauges and finished as the City Champion for LA and moved on to semi's of Nationals. When I did compete we ran lots of critical arguments on rhetoric, setcol and afropess so I am most familiar with that literature. tabula rasa
T
I lean aff in reasonability. Unless you're really down for a T debate in the 2nr I say you cut it in the block because I start to tune out.
DA
I enjoy these when they are impacted out well.
K
-assume I have no clue what your literature is and explain it to me like such
-you need to explain to me clearly why the aff's ontology/ epistemology/ reps etc are bad and why that should come first in the round
-you need to tell me why the aff's ontology/ epistemology/ reps etc are bad and what that implies
-you need a lot of comparative work and internal links that get impacted out for me to evaluate and vote for it
-if at the end of the round I don't know how that alt functions or the value of my vote for the K, I'm comfortable voting aff
I'm looking to judge rounds with lots of clash and fruitful debate---- that means I prefer smaller more cohesive arguments than 10 off
-you can affirm the resolution in any way
***-read arguments that you are familiar with not the ones you think will just win you the round****
Extra speaks if
-you're a good persuader not just a good debater
-clear & concise
