Hopefully this blurb only convinces you to read the arguments that you want to read...
This is my second-year coaching parli at WWU and my tenth year in the activity so I've probably seen a flavor of the arguments that you want to deploy. That being stated, I try to evaluate the round through the lens that you provide. If that means I adopt a normative utilitarian calculus then cool. Want me to not evaluate strictly from the flow? Awesome--just make sure that you provide an alternative weighing mechanism.
When I was debating I was a huge proponent of the classic TKO strategy but that shouldn’t deter you from running CPs, projects, or anything in front of me. While I do have theoretical dispositions against delay, object-fiat, and study CPs, that doesn’t mean that I will automatically drop a team for running those args. Though it is fair to say that I hold arguments that purposefully try to skew the other team out of the round to a higher level of skepticism. In other words, it’s not a good strategy to read 5 off that is littered with PoMo nonsense against a novice team when I’m sitting in the back. So be cool, have fun, and do what you think is best.
Some other random tidbits:
· Speaker points range from 25-30 with 25 needing major improvement, 27.5 being average, and 30 being perfect
· If you’re being excessively mean or violent then I won’t hesitate to vote you down: you are privileged enough to operate within this space but that doesn’t allow you to be an asshole.
· I’ll rule on a POO but often times they’re unnecessary; there is never a need to do it more than 3 times (I promise I’ll notice any new arguments) and they are often a non-sequitur to the heart of the debate.
· K v. K debates are BORING unless you can delineate between the competing methods
o You are allowed to perm in a methods debate unless there is a compelling argument for why you shouldn’t
o The Kritik should have a clear solvency mechanism and framework arguments should specifically lay out how the other team can engage with your arguments.
· Don’t run theory as a time suck
· For the love of all things sacred if you’re going for a procedural then only go for the procedural
o Demonstrated abuse is helpful but not required for my ballot on T
· If you’re clearly winning the debate then finish your speech and sit down—there’s no reason to beat a dead horse
· Clash of civilization debates are the way to my heart
· Obvi don’t expect me to fill in or favor your arguments just because they stem from an ideology that I also occupy