Tyler Durwood ParadigmLast changed 9/18 12:20P CDT
TLDR: I'm okay for everything, but don't assume I know your lit.
Important Note: I have done 0 research on this topic. While I will do my best to keep up with everything being said, keep in mind that I will have a tough time understanding any topic specific terms expressed during the debate.
References: Refer to Shaunak Lokre for the best rep of my paradigm.
Quals: Debated 4 years at Barstow HS. As a debater, I mainly read policy arguments and occasionally went for the K. While I am 100% down for everything, you shouldn't assume I know your lit so proceed with caution.
CP: All competition debate really depends on the round. I do think a well researched solvency advocate should be rewarded. AFF ground is also a thing that matters to me so I am willing to just vote on "this CP is abusive".
T: Tech over Truth. Don't be scared to go for this. However, I view these debates similar to condo. In condo debates, the NEG does not need to win that condo is good, just that condo is not bad. In T debates, the AFF does not need to win the topic is better with their AFF. Thus, I hold a higher threshold for the NEG's offense and emphasize defensive claims for writing my ballot. While high quality T ev matters in regard to the predictable limits question, precision by itself is not very persuasive to me. For the AFF, political salience seems like a silly standard to me. Asserting reasonability does not lower the risk of limits offense. It needs to be applied and impacted out in specific sections of the flow. Overlimiting is the best and only standard IMO.
DA: Fiat is immediate. I can buy 0% risk.
Case: I can buy 0% risk. While it's difficult to answer case in the 2NR, if you are going for a CP and K, I still highly recommend you go to this page and at least extend some defense. If you don't go to these pages, set up framing issues for why even if I you don't go to this page why you still win.
K: I'm open to and down for everything but you should assume I know nothing about your literature base. You must explain terms that you utilize because these terms have different contexts, meanings, and significance depending on the literature. Giving tons of examples really helps in high-theory/post-modern debates.
FW: I am 50/50 here. For the NEG, any type of FW is fine (Skills/Dogma/Fairness/Etc). If I vote NEG, usually the TVA is the major component in the decision. For the AFF, I think it's not necessary to have any relation to the topic and you don't need to have a model of debate, but I find it easier to vote AFF when you forward defensive claims to the NEG's limits offense with impact turns and not just impact turns by themselves. Examples of these arguments could be "no impact to fairness", "you have ground", or a unique counter-interpretation (for example, neg defends the topic and the aff criticizes it). If implementing defense to answer FW is not your style, impact calc needs to be the focus of the 2AR.
MISC: I hold an extremely high threshold for new args in the 2ar/2nr. I will naturally judge kick alt/CP unless told not to. I also have a pretty high threshold for a perf-con. For example, "you read FW which forces us to be productive under the topic which contradicts cap" is not a perf-con. Condo = T. Saying "you don't have evidence" is not an answer.
Full Judging Record
|Washburn Rural Debate Invitational||1569009600 9/20/2019||VADB8||6 R6||SMNW FM||Little Rock Central KG||Neg|
|Washburn Rural Debate Invitational||1569009600 9/20/2019||VADB8||5 R5||Lawrence Free State RM||Shawnee Mission West WZ||Aff|
|Great Midwestern Novice and JV Debate Championships||1521840600 3/23/2018||NCX||6 Quarte||Maine East PP||Oak Park and River Forest SK||Neg||Neg on a 3-0|
|Great Midwestern Novice and JV Debate Championships||1521840600 3/23/2018||NCX||5 5||Glenbrook North CM||Univ Of Chicago Lab MD||Aff|
|Great Midwestern Novice and JV Debate Championships||1521840600 3/23/2018||NCX||4 4||Univ Of Chicago Lab KC||Glenbrook North SK||Aff|
|Great Midwestern Novice and JV Debate Championships||1521840600 3/23/2018||NCX||2 R2||Iowa City BC||Glenbrook South RL||Neg|
|Great Midwestern Novice and JV Debate Championships||1521840600 3/23/2018||NCX||1 R1||Glenbrook North BC||SF Roosevelt KH||Neg|