Carolyn Ky Paradigm

Last changed 5 March 2021 9:58 AM PDT

Hi! I'm Carolyn! I use she/her pronouns

kamiak '20

stanford '24

Add me to the email chain: carolynkyy@gmail.com

Paradigm inspired by Kai Daniels, Niko Battle, and Larry Dang

tldr- Tech > Truth. Read whatever you want. When left to my own devices, I lean on my defaults, but prefer to be persuaded on how I should view the debate. CX is binding. Flow-oriented and speed should be dictated by clarity. Ending Speeches: Write My Ballot for Me. Start with overview with offense on top.

LD specific: Did policy debate in high school, so LARP/Policy judging is best. I'm not great for traditional or tricks debates. Most of my policy paradigm should apply. Let me know if you have any questions!

quick takes:

  • T > Theory
  • fairness is an impact
  • will vote on cheap theory shots when dropped unless it's a reverse voting issue
  • should be able to run a line between any arg in the 2ar to the 1ar
  • Flex prep is okay
  • Speaks start at 28.5 and I'll move that up and down. 29+ is reserved for people that I think will break or at least make the bubble.

Affs

  • Be super clear when reading the plan text
  • Don't enjoy affs with a bunch of scenarios that aren't developed
  • Affs should have good, well-warranted i/l evidence
  • I'm willing to vote on presumption
  • Don't enjoy plan flaw debates but willing to vote on it if answered incorrectly

Topicality

Since I’m not super familiar with the topic, I would advise going a bit slower so I can digest the jargon easier.

    • T is about the model of debate. I don't care about in-round abuse.
    • competing interps > reasonability 60% of the time
    • impact debate > procedurals
    • For aff - please have a counterinterp and a clear defense of reasonability. Reasonability is your best friend in t debates in front of me, but winning reasonability is not an autowin. It just lowers your threshold on the standards debate (by how much? you tell me).
    • For neg - please have (1) clear impact calc on the standards debate AND (2) a case list. I lean aff on most standards but having those two thing outlined will provide a clear ballot if done well. fx and extra-t are underutilized

DA

    • I tend to believe the weakest part of a DA is the internal link(s), so the aff should try to pick at it if true and the neg should be ready to defend it.
    • Clear throwaway da's that barely link to the aff will likely cause a slight drop in speaks
    • For aff - willing to vote on conceded or solid defense on DA
    • For neg - please have offense (i.e turns case). Generics das w/ specific links are great if ran well:)

CP

    • Theory can go either way with good ev/better tech/sound education args
    • For aff - you should prop ask about judge kick, need to win some offense against the cp AND why that outweighs the net benefit
    • For neg - won’t judge kick unless specifically told to (at least by the 2nr). Smart CPs that question/use the aff's mechanism make me :) You should probably have a solvency advocate but don't have a problem with a CP without one unless it's brought up by the aff. Then, both sides have to resolve that.

K

    • Familiar with cap, foucault, antiblackness, queer theory, asian id, and imperialism/set col, but overall have a limited knowledge base of kritiks.
    • I tend to vote for k's, because the aff reads generic answers without indicting anything the neg is saying. In general, I think aff teams SHOULD win k debates, since the neg tends to read a bunch of blocks with throwaway jargon words and can't explain the k/alt in CX
    • If you can't explain the K in CX in your own words, your speaks will not be great.
    • Lean towards aff fw 80% of the time, since most fw debates seem to be a wash anyway. You're not likely going to win that Ks should not be allowed in debate. However, when neg wins fw, all the neg has to do is win a risk of a link
    • Both sides but esp the neg need to have historical examples (the more recent the better) that prove their methodology/praxis true. The team with the most convincing real-world examples of their impacts/impact turns/links/link turns is likely going to win the debate.
    • For aff - don’t lose your aff (the best form of offense) in most of these debates when you explain why your impacts outweigh or why it's just a good departure from the squo. Don’t be afraid to engage the K and their thesis claims. Please have a coherent strategy. Impact turns are underutilized, but don’t contradict your case. While I don't condone sexism/racism/etc. good, but cap good, fem ir bad, etc is gg. Perm with link turns and alt solvency deficits as net benefits is a cool strat too. Will vote on theoretical voting issues to reject the alt
    • For neg - Don't love big overviews. Line by line is key. Ideal: have specific link(s) to the aff, have external impacts for each link, and why each link turns case. At the very least, have a link contextualized to the aff. Find specific lines in the aff. Don’t necessary need to win the alt if the link is debated well enough to be a da on its own. You can kick the alt if you tell me where on the flow you're gonna get offense and win. Treating the K like a da/cp with case push will be rewarded.

K Affs

    • Neutral on whether kaffs should get perms and like these debates

    • Ending speeches: whoever simplifies the round the best with concrete arguments is likely gonna win the round.
    • FW: While I believe "framework makes the game work", I see myself voting against fw because the neg reads a big shell in the 1nc and block and can't write my ballot with clear voters and standards in the 2nr. However, if you're prepared to read framework beyond your blocks, fw is a very powerful argument.
    • TVAs: They don't have to solve the aff, but "Carded TVAs with proper extensions are pretty damning for the aff and your good research/engagement will likely be rewarded (either with speaks or the ballot)"- Niko Battle.
    • K v K debates are very enjoyable when both teams indict the problematic aspects of the other's scholarship. I genuinely find these debates one of the most educational parts of debate.
    • For aff - Your aff should have a tie to the topic and a competing model of debate, but what that means is debatable. I should clearly know what the aff is doing by the 2ac, especially if it's based on lit I'm not familiar with. Enjoy k affs w/ a performative aspect. Huge overviews are not ideal. Prefer most work done on the line by line.

    • For neg - Please answer the case (don’t need to read cards- analytically poking holes in the aff’s methodology or solvency is great too. I will vote on presumption. Don't be afraid to engage the aff. Also, be creative- in the way Kai Daniels says it: “k affs some of the time can be unfair - so you should be too. read 6 off, 3 counterplans, make them go for condo and then go for t and say it outweighs. read their own cards back at them as piks and take advantage of the fact that they invited a debate that is ~unpredictable~."

Full Judging Record

Tournament Lv Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
SADL Online Tournament 4 MS 2021-04-10 VAR Semis SA Bronx BH SA Harlem North Central SL Neg Neg 2-1
SADL Online Tournament 4 MS 2021-04-10 VAR R3 SA Hudson Yards AF SA Midtown West DM Neg
SADL Online Tournament 4 MS 2021-04-10 VAR R2 SA Ditmas Park PD SA East Flatbush AK Neg
SADL Online Tournament 4 MS 2021-04-10 JV R1 SA East Flatbush BN SA Ditmas Park MV Aff
Puget Sound District Tournament HS 2021-02-27 CX R2 Interlake Nora Cai & Vlada Palanciuc Mount Vernon Finnly DeFrancisco & Sophia Grechishkin Aff
35th Annual Stanford Invitational HS 2021-02-06 PF-N Octafi Blake PV Cupertino SR Pro Pro 3-0
35th Annual Stanford Invitational MS 2021-02-06 PF-MS Triple VDA - Vancouver LP Katy TZ Con Pro 2-1
35th Annual Stanford Invitational HS 2021-02-06 PF-JV R6 American SG North Allegheny LT Pro
35th Annual Stanford Invitational HS 2021-02-06 PF-JV R5 Potomac LW Tsinghua International TC Pro
35th Annual Stanford Invitational MS 2021-02-06 PF-JV R4 American AG BL DZ Con
35th Annual Stanford Invitational HS 2021-02-06 PF-JV R3 Albany FL NSDA China Yellow WX Pro
35th Annual Stanford Invitational MS 2021-02-06 PF-MS R2 Taipei American HT Thornton MN Pro
35th Annual Stanford Invitational HS 2021-02-06 PF-MS R1 Ivy Plus HZ Potomac DM Con
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2021-01-29 LD R6 Unionville MP Presentation NB Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2021-01-29 LD R5 New Trier CS Calhoun WT Aff
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2021-01-29 LD R4 Brophy SA Memorial DX Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2021-01-29 LD R3 Bergen County Academies MS American Heritage Plantation EM Neg
Barkley Forum for High Schools HS 2021-01-29 LD R1 Southlake Carroll SD Harker AR Neg
Peninsula Invitational HS 2021-01-23 O CX R5 Glenbrook North WY Chaminade BV Neg
Peninsula Invitational HS 2021-01-23 O CX R3 Elizabeth Learning Center PO Pace TP Neg
2021 Kamiak Invitational HS 2021-01-21 CX-O R6 Garfield Riley Perteet-Cantu & Thomas Sander Garfield Jonah Hillman & Olivia Rosoff Neg
2021 Kamiak Invitational HS 2021-01-21 CX-O R3 Mount Vernon Sophia Grechishkin & Finnly DeFrancisco Kamiak Meara Curran & Fergus Curran Aff
2021 Kamiak Invitational HS 2021-01-21 CX-O R1 Interlake Owen Zhang & Sarah Guo & Rohan Mishra Mount Vernon Melanie Fuimaono & Parker Halgren & Verenice Ochoa Aff
Lexington Winter Invitational HS 2021-01-15 VCX Double Peninsula LL Brooklyn Technical SD Neg Neg 3-0
Lexington Winter Invitational HS 2021-01-15 VCX R6 Peninsula SY Stuyvesant EP Aff
Lexington Winter Invitational HS 2021-01-15 VCX R3 Pine Crest YG Josiah Quincy Upper DY Aff
Mount Vernon Invitational and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-01-14 LD-O Finals Bellevue Eric Ma Overlake Griffin Hehmeyer Aff Aff 3-0
Mount Vernon Invitational and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-01-14 CX-O Finals Timberline Maxwell Jewell & Michel Liao University Kylie Heaton & Nicholas Dawson Neg Neg 2-1
Mount Vernon Invitational and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-01-14 CX-O R3 Timberline Brady Dunn & Ani Rice Mount Vernon Finnly DeFrancisco & Sophia Grechishkin & Verenice Aff
Mount Vernon Invitational and NIETOC Qualifier HS 2021-01-14 CX-O R1 Eastlake Lila Rowland & Sarah Sung Timberline Maxwell Jewell & Michel Liao Neg
WBFL League Debate 3 HS 2021-01-09 PF-V R4 Loyola Grigorian & Gonzalez South Dizon & Shibata Pro
WBFL League Debate 3 HS 2021-01-09 PAR-V R3 Windwa Paccione & Madden CulCit Maung & Lee Gov
WBFL League Debate 3 HS 2021-01-09 LD-V R1 Marlbo Hope Lee West Chaturika Bandara Aff
La Costa Canyon Winter Classic HS 2020-12-04 CX R4 Lowell ST Peninsula CW Aff
NSDA Middle School Nationals HS 2018-06-19 CX R4 Amicitia American School Fes AC Tequesta Trace AB Aff