Hannah Wolfson ParadigmLast changed 9/8 7:32P CDT
Topic experience: reasonable
TL;DR pre-round version:
Do you, I really don't care.
Email chains over flashing if you can. Yes, I like to be included on those. My email is firstname.lastname@example.org. I don’t take prep for flashing/emailing as long as it’s not excessive.
How I evaluate specific arguments:
Clash debates – I've voted both ways. Take that as you will.
Aff teams: I like it when the aff relates to the resolution in some way. That doesn’t mean you have to have a plan, but talking about the topic might be a good idea.
Neg teams: yes, I'm in the camp that thinks there is a difference between T and FW. Have an impact pls thx.
Kritiks – go ahead.
I understand at least the basics behind a good amount. Still, explaining stuff is always good. Alts are usually underexplained, so lemme know before the 2NR how the alt functions/solves. Floating PIKs are probably not a reason to reject the team. Links of omission are not real links.
On framework, I lean towards weighing the aff, but I can be persuaded otherwise. I'll vote on "K tricks", but you have to do more than just saying the words "fiat is illusory" or "serial policy failure".
Topicality – way more of my 2NRs than I care to admit.
I really like T. That said, being removed from high school has its disadvantages when it comes to evaluating the minutiae of T debates on the HS topic. Avoid too many acronyms, please explain/contextualize things (especially the violation, it sounds obvious but you'd be surprised).
Theory – I’m down
I have no predisposition to sides on theory, but condo's prob the only reason to reject the team. You can win that one condo is bad or 10 condo are good in front of me, it all depends. Please slow down and do line by line on theory, as it makes it easier for me to judge.
Counterplans – Yep
The more specific to the aff the better. Re: where I lean on theory, see the above.
I don't really like judge kicking things unless there's an arg made as to why I should and the aff doesn't answer it (like, I will take "no judge kick because it's unfair" as an answer). Otherwise, if it's in the 2NR, the status quo is no longer an option.
Disads – can't beat the classics.
Don't read things that are racist.
Same with CPs, the more specific the better. Politics is fine I guess. They're probably not bad for debate, fiat probably doesn't solve the link.
That's pretty much it. If you have any other more specific questions, email me or ask me before the round.