Michael Simpson ParadigmLast changed 1/24 3:25P MDT
Feel free to add me to the email chain: firstname.lastname@example.org
Former high school policy and 4-year NDT debater (West HS, Highland HS, and Loyola Marymount in the 90’s), now a debate dad. Call me anything you like (Mike / judge / male pronouns).
Debate is a game of persuasion. Any argument is winnable if you do it well enough.
I vote on LBL and won't make arguments for you
Core Biases (which I’m open to changing if you challenge them effectively):
Debate is an academic game with only a few rules that I won’t let you argue about (time limits, order of speeches, a resolution that I’m expecting is relevant, no biting, etc.).
I vote based on the arguments presented in the round. Won’t ever intervene beyond enforcing time limits unless something rises to the level of kicking you out of the tournament.
If you drop an argument, you lose it.
If you act like an ass, I’ll probably ding your speaker points.
Clash is key, thus (non)topicality trumps impacts, and generic critiques of society that aren’t germane to the topic will be viewed skeptically. I don’t expect debate to be ‘fair’ and won’t go beyond the arguments presented to compensate for a broken society.
I’m liberal in my personal life, but will vote for any argument you can win, my political opinion aside.
Speed- is fine, so long as I can flow your tags and sources, and your cards should be comprehensible. I’ll ask once or twice by saying “clearer” if one of us is struggling. If you don’t take the hint, you risk me missing things. 01/24/20 is/was my first tournament on this topic, so define your acronyms for me the first time you use them, and don’t assume I’ve heard your arguments before.
Topicality – always willing to vote on it. Please don’t go for ‘the’.
Counterplans – fine. But so are multiple permutations.
Theory – potential abuse is hard to win. Actual abuse is somewhat easier. Being faster, smarter, better prepared, or having a specific identity doesn’t constitute abuse imo but winnable if you argue it right on the LBL.
Performance – Everyone is performing something the entire time we’re in the room. It can help or hurt your speaker points, but I vote on the line-by-line of my flow.
K- Specific links to clash-able critiques with well defined impacts will be weighed against the impacts to everything else, and can definitely win a round. I’ll assume we’re deciding each round based on the hypothetical world where the aff can fiat federal legislation, with hypothetical pros and cons, unless you can establish otherwise. Throwing out buzzwords or asking me to vote on identity isn’t going to get you anywhere,. Prove why it matters and what happens if it's not weighed.
Tag team cross-ex is fine, but give your partner the chance to answer because it's your prep and you should both know the arguments well enough to coherently answer questions.
I usually stop prep when the flash comes out or the email has been sent.
If you have any questions about what's on my paradigm or something that's not in it, feel free to ask!