Spencer Culver Paradigm

Last changed 9/19 8:02A CDT

NDT debater @ University of Wyoming – 2013-2018. 2x NDT qualifier.

yes email chain - spencerculver1@gmail.com


Short:
Make strong arguments, compare them with other arguments and assess their relative importance in the debate.

Debate how you’d like.

Make complete arguments.

Links are highly important to me, but good impact calculus wins debates.

Top level considerations:

- The winner of a debate is usually the team who has the strongest arguments (duh…). I am more interested in listening to a debate with strongly supported arguments and specific clash than any particular type/category of content in a debate (i.e. I prefer hearing a good debate over hearing one particular style or approach to debate).

- Identifying the important questions / winning the key arguments in a debate is under-done imo. Erring on the side of winning one, two, or three arguments and explaining why those win you the debate is far better than trying to win most of the arguments without explaining how they interact or weighing their importance. Good debaters make choices.

- Not a fan of the offense/defense paradigm. Willing to vote on ‘no risk of a link, impact, etc.’

- “The affirmative has the Burden of Proof to overcome presumption. The team advancing an individual argument has the burden of proof to advance a complete argument. If the significance of that distinction is unclear to you, ask and I can happily explain.” stolen from Travis Cram

- Keys to good speaks: organization/line-by-line proficiency, demonstrating deep knowledge on something relevant to the debate, excelling at cross-ex, humor.

Specific thoughts:


T / Framework: I like T debates. I think that there are ways to affirm the topic that don’t necessitate a traditional plan being read. I’d prefer an affirmative that has content connected with the topic, the more specific the better. I have no presuppositions against either. I spent more time going for T against critical affirmatives than defending critical affirmatives than T, but I think I’m pretty close to the middle on the issue. I tend to prefer clear interpretations with an outlined idea of how debates on the topic would go over vague ‘reasonable’ ones.

DAs: I like ‘em. Link and internal link specificity matters most to me. Warrant and evidence comparison is next in the line of importance. Impact calc wins debates though.

CPs: Having these things is best: a clear-solvency advocate and a world that doesn’t result in the entire aff. Competition is important. Specificity here is important. If it’s a highly nuanced CP, take some time in the 2NC overview to give me some bearings and explain the context.

Critiques: Link and internal link specificity matters to me here, too. Example-driven argument and comparison are very valuable. If the subject matter of the debate is complex, do what you can to make the content more concrete and clear for me.


Case debates: underloved, in my opinion. I like really in-depth case debates. It makes winning on the neg far easier.

Other notes: I have a lot of facial expressions. Paying attention to that could be advantageous. Being courteous is valuable. I don't like prep stealing.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/18/2020 Var OFs Lawrence Free State MR Blue Valley West BW Aff Aff on a 3-0
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/18/2020 Var R4 Lawrence Free State HB Blue Valley Northwest RY Aff
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/18/2020 Var R3 Lawrence Free State WR Blue Valley West AD Neg
Kansas Flint-Hills District Tournament 12/13/2019 CX R6 111 122 Aff Aff on a 3-0
Kansas Flint-Hills District Tournament 12/13/2019 CX R3 116 130 Neg Neg on a 3-0
Kansas Flint-Hills District Tournament 12/13/2019 CX R2 123 107 Neg Neg on a 3-0
J Matt Hill Invitational 11/22/2019 DCI R4 Lawrence Free State BH Shawnee Mission West MW Aff
J Matt Hill Invitational 11/22/2019 DCI R3 SMNW FM Sumner FA Aff
J Matt Hill Invitational 11/22/2019 DCI R2 Derby CS Lawrence Free State RP Aff
KCKCC DCI TOC Policy Qualifier 11/1/2019 DCI Quarte Barstow Noah Waldman & Meghana Lakkireddy Mill Valley Adam White & Tanner Smith Aff Aff on a 3-0
KCKCC DCI TOC Policy Qualifier 11/1/2019 DCI Octos Blue Valley Southwest Rory Stanfield & Chloe Shi Barstow Amanda Munsell & Jacqueline Tingle Neg Neg on a 3-0
KCKCC DCI TOC Policy Qualifier 11/1/2019 DCI Double Lansing Amber Dawson & Madelyn Atkins Shawnee Mission East Olivia Henry & Ana Lahovary Neg Neg on a 2-1
KCKCC DCI TOC Policy Qualifier 11/1/2019 DCI R6 Olathe East Teagan Townsend & Aryana Booth Barstow Eric Wright & Jack Eurich Aff
KCKCC DCI TOC Policy Qualifier 11/1/2019 DCI R5 Blue Valley Southwest Niko Helixon & Maddie Pieropan Barstow Miles Luce & John Lubianestsky Neg
KCKCC DCI TOC Policy Qualifier 11/1/2019 DCI R4 Derby Chloe Johnson & Sean Wentling Blue Valley Southwest Sean Khan & Riley Underwood Aff
Blue Valley Southwest 9/27/2019 Var R5 Eisenhower GS Newton SR Aff
Blue Valley Southwest 9/27/2019 Var R4 Blue Valley Northwest MY Shawnee Mission West CV Aff
Blue Valley Southwest 9/27/2019 Var R3 Lawrence Free State RM Lansing AD Neg
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/20/2019 VADB8 OFs Blue Valley West Jaguars MD Little Rock Central KG Aff Aff on a 2-1
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/20/2019 VADB8 DOFs Little Rock Central AR Blue Valley Southwest SwSa Aff Aff on a 2-1
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/20/2019 VADB8 R6 Jenks WO Wichita East WN Aff
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/20/2019 VADB8 R5 Wichita East RG Shawnee Mission South LR Aff
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/20/2019 VADB8 R4 Blue Valley Southwest SwSa Shawnee Mission West MW Neg
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/20/2019 VADB8 R2 Blue Valley Southwest PH Derby CS Aff
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/19/2017 IPF R1 12N239 14N361 Neg
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/19/2017 IPF R1 42N269 14N366 Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2015 CX Double Interlake DS Desert Vista LQ Aff Aff on a 3-0
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2015 CX R6 Interlake DS Sky View ML Aff
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2015 CX R5 Sky View CS Capital LL Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2015 CX R4 St. Vincent De Paul HM Interlake HY Aff
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2015 CX R2 Eagle CW George Washington CO AC Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2015 CX R1 Littleton Independent Policy LS Bingham SS Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2014 CX Finals Notre Dame AP Rowland Hall-St. Mark's LK Neg Neg on a 2-1
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2014 CX Octos Meadows NC Notre Dame AP Neg Neg on a 3-0
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2014 CX R7 Green Valley HZ Notre Dame AP Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2014 CX R6 Bingham WH Renaissance GM Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2014 CX R5 Hillcrest RH Gulliver Prep SA Neg
Alta Silver and Black 12/3/2014 CX R4 Hillcrest JM Meadows BL Neg