Ryan Kennedy ParadigmLast changed 7/15 1:38A EDT
Former 4-year congressional debater (11th in the senate at NSDA Nationals in 2016), also extensively coached PF at my school for the past two years. Coaching congressional debate privately now. For PF, I can handle any speed you throw at me within the realms of general acceptability in PF (don't spread like a college policy debater), and I'm good on the flow. If for some reason I can't keep up, I'll let you know. I like funny debates, but there's a fine line between being funny and being a jerk – be nice, especially if you're destroying a team, or your speaker points will suffer as a result.
Charlotte Catholic High School
Sparknotes Version (borrowed and edited from my former coach Akash Gogate):
- I'm normally able to tell myself I know what's going on - I understand most of the positions people read
- Good debating trumps good evidence any day - I rarely call for cards unless I don't think I'll be able to make a decision without them
- Cross-x is binding - I love debaters who use it well
- I reward debaters who can explain complex positions without relying on buzzwords/jargon
- My favorite debates are case debates (defense, impact turns, whatever)
- I'm tab minus blatant bigotry in round. I reserve the right to drop you if I find your argument too offensive to belong within the realm of academic debate (you're doing something seriously wrong if this happens)
- If you're going to read arguments about violence, particuarly sexual violence, please have a trigger warning in your case and be ready to read a different argument if your opponents request it.
- Off-time roadmaps are a vestige from policy, unless you're doing something really weird in your speech save us all five seconds and just start
Prep time starts when the other team begins reading the evidence they requested.
Start with framework at the top of all rebuttals, give me a way to evaluate the round. I prefer crisp, clear framework debates – give me an intuitive way to prefer your framework. I am more than willing to listen to "we win under both frameworks, here's why" – but make that clear to me.
I'd prefer summary to be (selective) line-by-line and final focus to be voters, but whatever floats your boat. I'm here to judge, not tell you what to do, but a really well-executed line-by-line in summary may earn you bonus points from me. I don't need to hear every argument in summary, but I think that you need to give me two or three portions of the debate narrowed down. Again, not gonna take speaks away if you don't, just my preference and makes my flow pretty clean. Kicking out of arguments is more than fine in summary.
Final focus should extend straight from summary – I will not buy any offense dropped in summary but brought up again in final focus. You don't get to basically make new responses/arguments in FF, especially if you're second speaker. FF should be weighing/voters. Don't be abusive, this activity is supposed to be fun.
Extensions: Make extensions clear – don't make me go back to my flow to try to figure out what on earth you're trying to talk about. Give me a point of reference for the evidence/warrant so I know where to go back to.
Theory: I am very reluctant to accept theory in PF. Make of that what you will. If you feel the need to, go for it, but know that I will be somewhat perturbed. I default to rejecting the argument, not the team, unless you can give me a compelling reason why. Just debate the topic instead, and you won't have to worry about this entire little mini-paragraph.
Evidence: For the love of god, don't make up evidence. This mean either a) fabricating evidence completely, b) misconstruing evidence to reach a different conclusion than the authors intended, or c) clipping cards. If there's an evidence challenge, be damn sure you want to go through with the challenge. If you call a challenge and I decide your challenge was unfounded, there's a very very very high likelihood you get dropped on the spot. In the same stead, if I decide that you have fabricated evidence, I will not vote for you. End of story. Integrity is important, don't throw it away for a win that won't mean anything in four years (or less, sorry but it's true).
On the Sept-Oct PF Topic (school searches), the Tiller evidence is crap and you know it. Probable cause does not always require a warrant. Stop using it.
Congress: Coming soon
If you have any questions, just ask.