Peyton Reeves ParadigmLast changed 1/11 2:14P EAST
Lee's Summit High School (MO) 18'
Mo State 22' (NDT/CEDA and NFA-LD)
Pronouns are They/Them.
Non-in round things -
Please don't call me Judge, it makes me felt kind of excluded from the conversation that is happening in the debate, and kind of makes me feel like a external to the debate at hand. My name is Peyton, nice to meet you :)
Yes Email Chain or speechdrop etc. - Preeves22@gmail.com
Background on me - I debated in Missouri and did Policy things for 3 years, ran DA's, CP's and all that. Now I am in college, and am on a squad that reads mainly policy arguments. but, whilst I enjoy those args to some extent. I mainly like and run K's. but,as a current 2A there is only so much you can do when the 2N has most autonomy on what I read on the neg, so if you check my wiki for this year. I have read some Policy args. I have put in here a list of literature that I know and that I have read. This does not mean, that you get a free pass at just skipping explanation of your K, not how that works. The reason I put it there is to let you know what literature that after the round I can probably give you advice on advancing your content on, and how to improve that wise.
post the round - I very much like how Will Morgan makes decisions, The way that I make decisions is similar to theirs, but one difference and something that I like to do, is to look at all the possible ways that I can vote for each side, and find the "cleanest" or what I think is logically the best decision to be made.
In round -
- Tech > Truth
- This is High School, so I don't expect too much cursing considering the place you are at. But, I tend to curse like a sailor, so just a heads up.
- Ad Hod attacks are objectively not okay, and I don't tolerate it. I will ask tab what to do if I or the other team finds something offensive.
- Debate is a game , go fast idc.
- I like to be transparent through facial expressions, reading your judge is good. But, don't let that influence your're debating too much. Focus on what you are doing and what you think you are doing right no matter what I think. I just interpret the argument and how it was read.
- I don't have a default on education or fairness, you tell me why. But, I think that debate is inherently should be and can be educational, not sure about fair. Just so you know what logically makes sense for me. You tell me how it's fair, then I can roll with it. I think Dialogue should be the priority to debate, but if you think fair and equitable rules are a pre-req to that. That makes a decent amount of sense.
- CLASH PLEASE, aka just make sure that you're contextualizing stuff with the affirmative in mind and give me a visualization on what happens when x happens. Does it lead to y? or does it make y worse? better? not happen? Tell me what happens post-plan, helps me write my ballot easier.
- Don't have to be topical.
- You should probably have a impact coming out of the 1AC if you want yourself to be in a good position, I don't see enough of an impact extended through the debate told to me especially on high theory stuff. (I fall into this trap sometimes, you shouldn't though)
- I also think framing ideas are essential parts of all critical theory, you should use it as a great tool to your advantage.
- Typically like it when you use all the tricks that you read in the 1AC.
- I'm fine with judging these debates, I have judged plenty at the MSDI camp this year on immigration (2018 - 2019) as well as judged some High School Tournaments in the KC Mo area, and the SWMissouri Area.
- makes the game work
- think it's a good test for all kritkal affirmatives
- TVA's are really good, and deadly as well as Switch Side Debate. It helps give your interpretation a lot more leverage, on how they could of been topical and still read the aff. Making your interp not impossible for their content or form of debate to happen.
- not inherently a rule imo
- tell me why it's important though, and I will buy it. You can probably tell this is a consistent theme for how i think through most arguments. Tell me why things matter, impact it out.
- I think these are good arguments don't mind them
- each part is essential, but I think I/L are really key, telling me how that works makes it easier to vote on this.
- Link Specificity is always good and necessary
- I think the permutation is a test of competition unless you tell me otherwise and why that is. .
- Should probably have a solvency advocate, gotta hold you to a similar theoretical level to the affirmative if you are giving me something better to vote for. But, you can not read one, but the 2AC could and probably would punish you for this.
- I like ADV Cp's, are very clever with a well thought out strategy, but I rarely see them.
- I know the general thesis of most K's, I like them a lot. I am also a philosophy major so that helps.
- Just because I like these arguments doesn't mean that you should read them, do what you do best.
-Here's a list of K's that I know and can maybe give you advice on.
- Baudrillard ( I currently read this)
- Bataille (I currently read this)
-marxist theories specficallly, like Hardt and Negri, or Jodi Dean. (So, yes I have read a good amount of your ev on the Cap K against planless affs)
- Deleuze and Guttari. (Anti-Oedipus is still hard for me to read, I can only understand so much psychoanalysis)
- Queerness (I currently read this)
- Transness (I currently read this)
- Set Col
- Link Specificity is key, read me lines from the aff, contextualize your link inside the affirmative. I really need to know what is wrong with the world of the aff. This is the hardest part of the K imo. Nail this and it makes the rest of the work on the K a lot easier.
- I am a weird cookie here, idk. I really like theory debates for some reason, I think talking meta level about what things should and shouldn't happen in debate is good. Let's improve debate!
- but please slow down a lil. I can only type so fast.
- I time everyone, and I will let you know what your time is.
- prep is over when you are done typing/ actually prepping. Sending doc is fine, but if i see you prepping still time will keep going.
Other random things that I like
- DO IMPACT CALC. IT'S SUPER HELPFUL AND IS ENCOURAGED THAT YOU DO IT.
- I am flowing on computer, you can prob see when I am and am not flowing use that how you like.
- Pointing out that something was conceded is not extending it. You still gotta explain your stuff and how that implicates everything.
- Speaker points (policy specfic)
What did you do? - 26 or less
Very bad Strategical decision in this round - 26.5
Below average - 27
average - 27.5
p good - 28
really good - 28.5
I think you are gonna go to quarters and do well at a lot of tournaments. - 29
Sems of every tournament - 29.5
Winning Finals all the time - 30
ofc i will put you in between, but that's my general scale.
Most of all have fun! I come judge HS debate because debate is a space i like to call my home and wish for other people to do the same.