Trevor Provost Paradigm
Last changed 6 December 2019 8:00 PM CEST
I've done LD in high school for 3 years. I like traditional LD, but I won't turn away more progressive styles if it's done well.
I'd rather you stay away from plans, counter plans, K's, or any other advocacy outside of the resolution and the inverse resolution.
I flow but I still vote truth over tech as long as its extended throughout the round.
I want heavy clash on the value and criterion debate, even in the first negative speech.
Obviously contentions are still important but if your rebuttals are 70% value/criterion debate and 30% contentions, I'm def okay with it.
Explain how your contentions prove that affirming/negating the resolution helps to achieve your values! Your contentions don't matter if they don't prop up your value, or if you don’t prove that your value matters.
I'm pretty comfortable with most values/criterions so unless you're doing something really obscure or abstract, you probably won't have to spend too much time explaining what it means but instead focus on how it functions in the round and interacts the with contentions.
And the burden debate does matter to me, if nobody reads them the that's fine, but if somebody does and you don't explain why your's are better or how you fit their's, you’ll probably lose.
Full Judging Record