Tim Wegener ParadigmLast changed 11/12 12:10A CST
Greenhill '19, Sophomore at Northwestern
Put me on the chain – firstname.lastname@example.org
I have a 2nd monitor so if I'm not looking at my computer I am still paying attention. Nobody wants to read a 5 page paradigm so I'll keep it brief.
In the interest of full disclosure: I'm not great for the K (although probably less so on the CJR topic). In policy aff vs k debates, it is nearly always a framework debate or an impact turn debate. Assuming that it is not an impact turn debate, I care a lot more about framework than the average judge. When teams do not defend governmental action, I am better for counter interp that gives some role for the negative rather than impact turning everything. I am persuaded by fairness, but probably more so by clash.
In policy debates, I probably care more about impact comparison than most other people (DA turns case, it turns faster than the adv, etc). Good judge for conditionality and other aff theory arguments, better for the neg in competition debates. I will judgekick if not otherwise instructed (this must begin before the 2ar unless the negative never says the CPs/alts are conditional). Ok with inserting rehighlightings. More ok with newish args in the 1ar given new explanation in the block than most. Ev matters to me a lot. Not great for reasonability 2ars.