Varsity policy debater at UH and policy coach for Dulles HS.
I do not have strong preferences for any type of argument as long as you give me a good reason why you should get my ballot. I am far more likely to be persuaded when you clash over warrants rather than card names.
Here are my more specific opinions:
- I like case debate. I think I take aff solvency more seriously than a lot of judges. I am not unwilling to write a ballot on presumption.
- I think plan-specific internal links are very often shoddy. Nevertheless, debaters often ignore this and focus their attention on the impacts / internal links to the impacts. For instance, affs should be able to defend how their plan gets them to the same econ decline impacts read year over year, and negs should look to exploit the ambiguities in the aff's explanation.
- You should probably be going for T. I think topicality has fallen out of favor, such that most policy affs aren't even topical anymore. I think T is often a very smart argument if you can execute on it.
- T/FW is about competing visions of debate. It's not enough to be right about whether the other team violates your interp, you have to tell me why your interp makes debate better. I know this is basic, but I feel like a lot of the time T debates can get lost in the weeds. The big picture is important.
- Just like affs, I think the internal links in most disads are pretty bad. This should be a point of contestation.
- Disad debates can devolve into contextless card dumps. I am more persuaded by more direct clash.
- I won't judge kick for you if there's offense on the CP. Maybe you can persuade me to, but I think that it should be a strategic choice whether or not the take the CP into the 2nr.
- I think aff teams don't read theory enough against the counterplan. However, I struggle to find a situation where I would drop the team as opposed to the argument. I won't vote on condo bad.
- The best counterplans come from the aff's own solvency advocate. This is usually an easy way to win the round on top of being a big flex.
- I like K debate. That doesn't mean I will fill in the gaps for you. If you want me to vote on the alt, you have to explain to me what exactly that means for the round/world.
- Links are very important. Even independent of the alt, they can often be sufficient to win the round as a case turn. However, it is crucial that they are contextualized to what the aff actually does. Bad links are often shielded by the perm, while good links prove its inefficacy.