Daryl Workman ParadigmLast changed 3/2 11:12A MST
History, Language Arts, Civics and Constitution teacher, Debate Coach, former Marine.
Judged PF, LD, Policy, Congress, BQ, and most IE events.
POLICY PARADIGM: (drop down for LD and PF)
Spreading: If you don't say something in the round, benefit or harm to your case, it isn't part of the round. Additionally, only what you SAY can I understand was said. Your shared evidence files do not count if you don't get around to saying what is written there. SOOOO... speak clearly on taglines and whatever you want to be considered clearly as your evidence.
Kritiks: great, if you identify the relevance to WHAT IS BEING DEBATED well before your rebuttal.
Example:Religious freedom is not a racism issue so don't try to identify your whole religious freedom argument as not worthy of arguing because you get to say the word racism.
Spreading: I will not listen to spewing.
I am a traditional judge but I can operate inside much of the progressive methodology (Kritiks should stay in policy, or go away there too). If I can't understand you, you aren't competing.
Topicality: The quality of your debate will be judged on presenting the topic as the topic (Topicality). Throwing in racism as an argument for something that doesn't even relate just because you like to argue about that thing, doesn't bode well for your technique. In other words, if you must spend more time dedicated to showing why your points are part of the topic instead of why they are more valid than the points of your opponent, you are not on topic.
Theory: Your voters are important to have, but just saying that you win because such-and-such doesn't mean you actually win. Prove your argument is right with valid evidence.
Kritik: Doesn't belong in Lincoln Douglas. If you intend to win based on the idea that you shouldn't be debating something, you won't.
Framework: If you are going you give me an "off-time road-map" you should use it. I will be able to flow better if you address items in the order you deem most valuable, or at least identify as most valuable. If I can't figure out your arguments and what evidence is attached to the argument, I will have a hard time figuring out if you won.
In essence, make sure you make it obvious what you are trying to get across.
Not yet identified separately. See LD paradigm for best modality application in PF.