Debated at Notre Dame for 4 years in policy
2n/1a (I was a 2a/1n for my first 2 years of debate, but I probably have a more 2n mindset than I do as a 2a)
tech > truth BUT true analytic > shitty evidence
***UPDATE: I am not completely informed on the water topic so don't assume I know everything
**SPEECH/WSD PARADIGM AT BOTTOM
- I know it's hard on everyone, so as long as you explain your situation don't worry that I'll dock any speaks
- I won't be following the speech docs during your speech, so be clear when you're speaking
- If I can't hear you or if my wifi is bad, I'll verbally let you know
- my camera will be on when I'm on my computer, if my camera is off that means I went to the bathroom or I went to get a glass of water, but I'll also let you know in the chat that I'm leaving
I will dock your speaks if:
- you are rude/insulting to your partner, opponents, and anyone else
- you are racist/sexist or anything similar
Some trends I found when I gave high speaks:
- great impact calculus
- judge direction (written ballots in your speeches)
- warrant comparison
- tricky spins
- gutsy decisions
I'll evaluate the debate on what is said in the debate rather than my own preferences. When faced with opposing arguments, I'll look to the cards that you extend in the rebuttal speeches and read through them. However, when I'm unable to resolve anything in the debate, I'll default to my personal preferences listed below. Judge direction is always good and helps me evaluate the debate much easier. Have fun!
*Everyone asks this but I'm fine with tag-team cross-x, as long as you give the person who's supposed to question and/or answer the chance to do so
*Also if an argument is dropped, I won't give it weight unless you extend the argument answering it. Don't just point out it's dropped
This is my personal opinion, but I think a lot of affirmatives don't really use their aff. You have 8 minutes of offense from the 1AC. Use it!
Framing is important it tells which impact I should prefer more, so even if you win aff solvency or the disad story, I'll vote on the impact linking to the framing story that's winning.
I really like gutsy and risky arguments (i.e. if the negative reads a new impact in the block and you impact turn it, and that's what you go all-in for in the 2AR) I'm all in and will probably give you high speaks.
I love a good impact story with some impact calculus and turns case. I give a DA more weight if the links are more specific to the aff
I like to see an explanation of both in-round abuse and how it destroys debate outside of rounds. I think that makes a strong and compelling argument.
debatability is the impact - limits, ground, fairness, education are all internal links UNLESS you give me a reason on why [xyz] should be an impact
case lists and TVAs are really persuasive to me
As a 2N, I love a good cheaty and shifty counterplan, so I'll consider it more than the average judge. Every counterplan needs a good overview though so I understand how the CP functions and what are the mechanisms behind it
*Ks I am familiar with -- Antiblackness, Set Col, Fem IR, Security, Queer Theory, Psychoanalysis
Honestly, you can read any K in front of me as long as you explain the story well
If you win framework, you don't automatically win the debate, BUT it gives you an extra 3 steps ahead. I evaluate all the arguments underneath the K by the framework given.
I really don't like fiat is illusory arguments where all your links are predicated off of, and I'll probably not vote on it unless dropped or convinced otherwise
I'm fine with floating piks but make sure you answer theory if given.
the aff [cumulative]
- i'm fine with them - the closer you are to the topic the better
- usfg is bad shouldn't be the only argument, I want more creativity and spin if you are reading a k-aff
- you get a perm
- debatability is the impact - limits, ground, fairness, education are all internal links UNLESS you give me a reason on why [xyz] should be an impact
- past voting history states that I'm easily convinced that procedural fairness is an impact
k v k
- love this - it's such a power move
- make sure you explain everything to me because these debates can get really confusing
- similar to topicality paradigm
- basically, if dropped and exploded, I'll give it weight
- *perf con is a reason why you could sever your reps*
wsd & extemp
I've judged only some wsd & speech, BUT I have done some debates in wsd and know a bit about speech and understand the structure. Honestly, just debate, argue, and convince well and I will judge to the best of my abilities. I will judge without personal bias and vote on whoever did the better speaking.