Nasim Salehitezangi ParadigmLast changed 10/14 6:39P EDT
Niles West High School 2014-2018
Trinity University 2018-Now
Last Updated: October 2018
Email: Salehitezanginasim@gmail.com (please put me on the email chain)
I'm open to all arguments as long as they're not morally reprehensible. I did policy throughout all of high school, but that's only because I wasn't familiar with critique literature. I would have definitely read a k aff if I knew how to. So you can read whatever you want in front of me. I'm going to try my best to evaluate every single debate fairly. There are ways you can help me with this!
- Don't use acronyms! I'm not familiar with the topic and might have no idea what you're talking about.
- Don't spread through analytics. This doesn't mean you shouldn't spread. If you're going for an argument that requires a lot of explanation, I want to make sure I can write everything down on my flow and use it to make a fair decision.
- Don't assume I always know what you're talking about. I'm familiar with most arguments, but I don't want to vote you down because I misunderstood something.
Important ways I evaluate debates
- I don't vote on cards alone. Explanation of an argument will get you way farther than an extra card. Debate is an argumentative activity. You need to explain why you're winning. I won't reward a team for reading a ton of cards and expecting me to just read them after the debate.
- I'm 50/50 on tech vs. truth. If you explain why one matters more than the other, then I'll evaluate the debate that way.
- I'll only read cards after the debate that I think are relevant to my decision. If there are cards you want me to read after the debate, you should extend/reference them in your speech.
Explain everything to me. If a team asks you something generic, and you're going for a complex argument, use that time to make sure I understand what's going on. Keep speaking until they ask you to stop. Feel free to ramble on and explain other parts of the debate that you think are important. Also a great time to explain acronyms or things about the topic that I might not know. However, you should use cross ex as an opportunity to make arguments and use them later on in the debate. You'll probably get higher speaks if you use cross ex well and incorporate it into the debate.
These debates are great! I'm not familiar with the topic this year, so I probably won't understand your case lists. That being said, there are other ways to paint a picture of the best version of the topic and still win my ballot.
One thing to note -- the aff can win my ballot on we meet alone, so make sure your violation actually applies.
Also, I won't vote on ASPEC. 2A's, you can feel free to just ignore this argument.
Great! I will reward 2A's who can logically beat a disad. I'm a little different on this than most people. An aff team can win my ballot by simply pointing out logical fallacies in a contrived and weak disad. That being said, this shouldn't encourage you to read zero cards against a disad. For the neg -- if you're reading a contrived disad, I'll be more likely to vote for you on dropped arguments.
Also great! Advantage counterpleas are definitely underutilized. Sufficiency framing!!! Frame the debate!!! Tell me why the net benefit outweighs the risk of a solvency deficit. You can read really abusive counterplans, but you better be good at answering theory. If the aff doesn't read theory, you're lucky. If the aff goes for theory, you're in trouble. You can go for theory in front of me, but that shouldn't dissuade you from going for good solvency deficits. I won't kick the counterplan unless you tell me to do it. Status quo = a viable option always means judge kick.
Read them! I haven't experienced many of these debates, but if you win, you win!
Sure! I'll vote on it. Not on the neg. Never go for just theory on the neg.
You can read any k you want in front of me. I want to judge debates fairly. Remember that I don't know a lot of k literature, so you'll need to explain more than usual. You'll probably need to slow down here. For example, if you say there's "x disad" on the perm, give me time to write it down before moving on. I won't remember what the disad to the perm is if I don't write down what it means. Links should be specific, but if you're winning on a generic link then that's fine.
K vs policy aff
You can definitely read these in front of me! I'm familiar with these debates, since I've had a lot of them. These debates are the ones where explanation is crucial. I'm not familiar with a lot of k literature, so you'll probably need to do more explaining than usual. Please don't spread through analytics in these debates. I need to make sure what every disad on framework means.
K vs k affs
Do whatever you want. I encourage you to cause chaos. I might have no clue what's going on, but somehow I will form a ballot. This might be a coin toss, but it'll be fun. I really hope to judge one of these debates someday.
Do whatever you want. I know these debates and will vote on any impact!
- I like jokes
- References you can use -- Game of Thrones, Rick and Morty, Avatar the Last Airbender, something popular
- If you know people I know in debate and make a funny joke
- Be bold and do risky things
- Some debates don't require a full speech. You can end a speech in 1 minute if they dropped something like topicality.
Don't do these things
- Be super mean to your partner/opponents
- Overpower your partner during cx
- Say morally reprehensible things
- Expect cards to win you debates
- Attack someone's identity, beliefs, etc.
- Clip cards