Last changed on
Thu February 29, 2024 at 3:50 AM CDT
If I am judging you at a tournament with preferences, then you should strike me if you do not agree with all of the following:
-I am an educator first. If anything happens in the debate that I deem would not be okay in a high school classroom, I will stop the debate and vote against the team that engaged in the inappropriate behavior.
-The affirmative should defend a topical plan and defend the implementation of the plan.
-Affirmative plans these days are too vague. You only get to fiat what your plan says, not what it could mean or what you want it to mean. If you clarify your plan in cross-x, the negative can use that clarification to setup counterplan competition.
-The negative should prove why the plan causes something bad to happen, not why it justifies something bad. In other words - most of your Kritks are probably just FYIs.
-I evaluate debate in large part based on the line-by-line. If you cannot flow, I am not a good judge for you. If you cannot specifically answer the other team's arguments and apply your arguments to them and instead just read pre-scripted blocks, I am not a good judge for you.
-Debate is a communicative activity. I don't follow a card document. I listen to what you say. I will only read evidence if I cannot resolve something in the debate based on how it was debated.
-For something to count as an argument it must be complete and explained. I also must be able to understand what you are saying.
-My lifetime speaker point average range is probably lower than what you are used to.
-If you are visibly sick during the debate, I reserve the right to forfeit you and leave.
