Matthew Tan ParadigmLast changed 10/23 6:20P EDT
I debated at Lexington High School for 3 years
Please put me on the email chain: firstname.lastname@example.org
Tech > Truth
Please slow down instead of trying to spread 500 wpm. My ears are not the greatest and slowing down will allow me to flow your arguments better.
Spin (explanation) > Ev, to a degree
I was a 2a, which means I follow more of a 2a perspective on issues like theory.
I prefer well developed arguments over shotgunned speeches.
Please do line by line and it will be much easier for me to flow you. No 4 minute overviews and then saying "I did that in the overview"
I am not very well versed with Immigration policy. I won't know any of the jargon or abbreviations on this topic. It may be wise to simplify your explanations in front of me.
I understand that camp files are limited and also that everyone is trying out new arguments. While, I obviously have biases against certain arguments, you should read what you would like to practice. I will do my best to evaluate the round in front of me and provide appropriate advice. Nevertheless, judge adaptability is also an important skill so you could disregard this statement.
K affs: I am probably not the best judge for these affirmatives. I always defended a plan text and went for traditional policy neg arguments like politics. I frequently went for fw versus k affs. This does not mean I will immediately vote you down if you read a k aff; however, it does mean that I better understand the arguments that teams going for fw/t will be trying to make and also means that I will require a higher bar of explanation for k affs than you are probably used to doing.
Ks: Really did not touch Ks very much either. Besides neolib, my understanding in critical literature is very limited and I am going to understand traditional aff arguments that plan text teams against Ks much better. Going for the K will require a high level of explanation. I generally feel a good portion of K link cards I have run into are extremely generic and not aff specific. I will probably be much more persuaded by aff specific ks. I particularly am undereducated with pomo, baudrillard, bataille, dng, psycho, etc.
T: Most of my 1nrs last year consisted of extending T or a politics DA. I will default to competing interps, unless told otherwise. Going for T is perfectly fine in front of me.
DAs: I enjoy a in-depth da debate regardless of whether or not it is a generic with specific link ev or an aff specific da. Impact calc is very helpful. Many DAs are still foolish and can be beaten by rehighlighting neg ev or even smart analytics. Smart analytics > card dumping.
CP Theory: I'm not great for process CPs
Aff Leaning: Process, Delay, Word PICs, 2NC Cps
Neg Leaning: PICs and especially PICs out parts of the plan
Context Specific: Consult/Condition
Condo: This is up in the air for the debate.
DON'T discriminate, misdisclose, be disrespectful in cx/ speeches, or clip cards.
I will not vote on anything that happens outside of the round. I believe it is outside of my jurisdiction and should be brought to the attention of the tournament heads.
For Speaks/Impressing Me
Everything I said under general
Giving final rebuttals off the flow
Humor with a purpose