Molly Martin ParadigmLast changed 10/27 12:09P PST
i'm molly, debated at c.k. mcclatchy for 4 years and i'm now in my second year debating for gonzaga university.
- assistant coach at lewis and clark high school (go tigerz), doin some work for ckm also (go lionz) (lions, tigers, no bears, oh damn)
1. the short and sweet version (longer explanations below):
- email chain: firstname.lastname@example.org (if you have any questions this didn't cover, email me here)
- i love this activity so much in every way it presents itself, so there's very little you can't run in front of me. i'm not well versed in high theory, but that doesn't mean i'm not down to listen - i've probably dabbled in most other forms of argumentation, though. if you’re attempting to answer the question of should you pref me, i find that k teams seem to pref me more often if that gives you any hint to my ideological leanings. i consider myself pretty flex, so whatever you do is fine by me
- i have accessibility issues - you can go as fast as you want so long as you're clear. however, you should slightly slow down for analytics, clarity over speed, signpost, speak loud. if you have music, please send me the lyrics of the song.
- write my ballot - frame the round, impact things out, have evidence comparison, and implicate your arguments and you should be set with me. this applies to any arg you'll read in front of me.
- clipping/being a bad community member will result in the lowest speaks i can give you and a loss. i'll almost definitely be talking to your coach(es) afterwards. you should know better not to use violent rhetoric (racist, sexist, transphobic, etc.), but that doesn't mean people don't do it.
((also stealing prep makes me unhappy))
- we are people before we are debaters, be nice and treat people with respect. if someone asks for accommodations, do your best to meet them.
2. full paradigm:
- line by line > your 4 minute long overview
- you need to extend and win an alternative unless you rlly impact out an independent DA to the aff
- contextualize your links; i know the state is bad, but if that's all you got, it probably won't go well for you.
- read a lot of queerness kritiks in high school, but just because i'm familiar with a kritik does not mean i'll do the work for you. :)
- i know a lil bit about the topic - judged at the GDI and what not, but if you introduce any nuanced concepts relevant to the topic, it'd be in your best interest to give a more in-depth explanation.
- 2ac args that are like "it was on the wiki" "we're t bc you had specific links" are a no-go with me
- t is fundamentally debate about what the topic should look like; i don't think the neg needs to win in-round abuse necessarily. show me what the rez looks like under your interp/counter-interp
case: love her! more of her!
- impact turn debates need qualified ev - i won't be happy listening to a warming good debate if your author is from 4chan and thinks the earth is flat
- good link stories are key. this means your links should be contextual, or you just need to do the work in terms of spin.
- make sure you’re making and engaging with turns case arguments.
- i'll vote on low risk if you win it (unpopular opinion? idk)
- specific net benefits are preferred; affs should have specific solvency deficits
- judge kick needs a justification
do your thing! i won't automatically vote against you if you're not in the direction of the topic, but i think being in the direction of the topic is a good thing.
- don’t be an a-hole answering k affs, especially those that center identity. you can be responsive without undermining your opponents personally.
identity affs: this space is what you make it. i understand debate as a survival strategy and i respect that, but you need to tell me why that’s a reason i should vote for your strategy.
- no pressing thoughts here. i'm totally fine if you read it!
- never my fav decisions to make, but if its a dropped violation that you impact out, all power to you. but honestly i'm kind of a stickler here so it's potentially not in your best interest for smaller theory violations
- you need an interpretation and a substantive impact. how do you better access the internal link to insert impact here
- with that being said, there's certain theory violations that i don't feel like voting on ever (vague alts, no neg fiat). i will if i have to, so don't let me stop you from doing you!
- condo: i lean neg here, but my leanings will not determine my ballot. :)
satirical arguments - fine, good times, still need to be impacted out.
debate is a communicative activity - this means two things
a. “insert chart” - yeah i will, but it’s on you to do the work of explaining it
b. inserting re-highlighting? you have to read what you highlighted
have fun! regardless of if you win or lose, there is something to be taken away from every debate; always strive to learn from debates, because your skills leave the round with you. as an ex-high school debater who tried really hard to be uber competitive, i can tell you now with full certainty - Bids Don't Actually Matter, and your bids or lack thereof do not determine your value and worth - debate is about what you bring to the debate community and what you can get out of it. make sure it's positive, both for yourself and for other people.
if you have any questions about college debate or are interested in debating for gonzaga (go zags!), please hit me up! i would love to talk to you about CPD.