Felix Li ParadigmLast changed 2/9 2:43P EDT
I did four years of LD debate in high school, on both the local and national circuit, so I'm well-versed in is both progressive and traditional arguments. I am tabula rasa above all, which means that you can convince me of anything. There has been one case when a debater convinced me not to follow my own paradigm. Barring that, here's my take:
While I won't drop a debater for doing so, I would prefer that they only run progressive arguments if their opponent also has experience with them; otherwise there's no real engagement.(Clarification: A progressive arg will still win against a traditional arg if the traditional debater doesn't know how to deal with it, but I may give a ~0.5 speaker point penalty. Exceptions made for plans and especially counterplans, since I consider them barely progressive).
If you spread, I just ask that you flash or send your case to your opponent if they request it. I'm fine with flex-prep, but let me know you want it before your opponent starts their prep.
I find that many debaters don't adequately engage with their opponent's framework - remember to directly attack them on the line-by-line if that's strategically right (and it is, more often than people think it is)
I will disclose at the end of a round if both debaters agree to it.
Weighing is important - for substance, for K's, and for theory. If there is absolutly no weighing, I default Theory>T>K>Policy>Traditional. That assumes that not a single sentence is spoken about what comes first