2020 — CANCELED, US
Policy Judges Paradigm ListAll Paradigms: Show Hide
a little bit about myself
i debate for plano east
- 2018 to present: CX
- im the 2AC & 1AR and a 2N, i was very flex - on the k i go for afropess(warren,wilderson,sharpe), black baudy, cap, security - on policy i ran everything, mainly high off strats
if u dont wanna read all of this then this is all u need to know -
do whatever you are best at, i understand most high-level args, i hold a firm stance against judge intervention and i will do so in round to the best of my ability unless the round calls for it (don't run anything offensive and were good) - I don't have opinions on what u run so j do what u wanna do
Tech > Truth
I agree with a lot of vishvak bandi's paradigm - so j look at their paradigm
CJR - ive been to a good amt of tournaments now so im good for anything.
ks are fire - have links to the aff and dont just throw up a bunch of buzz words - tbh I've only read a good amount of afropess lit and all the subsets of that. That being said I am decently familiar with most other kritiks, so if u can explain it then go for it - examples and historical analysis is always great, contextualize ur alt.
love em - got for it. I would prefer if the aff was like somewhat related to the topic, frame what the ballot does - but other than that everything else is up to u
FW is lit - my options about fw don't matter to me when im judging so u can persuade me on any area of fw as long as ur not being excessively rude - C/Is and counter definitions are great, TVA's can be deadly w the right evidence, all the generic standards are fine if u wanna pull out a new standard that's lit too.
go for it, everyone likes a good DA v case debate. Specific links are good but generics are fine as long as u make a convincing argument. Turns case arguments are always fire, make sure u are doing impact calc. Good CP/DA debates are the best
again go for it, these debates tend to get messier but if u wanna go for it and win it ill be more than happy to vote for it. Read NB's lol, don't change ur plan text mid-round, contextualize the cp to the aff.
if ur 2AC and 1AR is an o/v w very little LBL I'm not going to do work for u - the case is the affs best weapon so use it as such - do impact calc
good topicality debates hit different - again my options on the actual technicalities of topicality debates don't matter when making my decision that being said u can turn this debate into whatever u want and as long as u win I don't mind - just don't make it messy as hell
go for it - condo is prob good in most cases so i would say i err neg on that, other than that i don't err a side on theory
DO a 360 when reading a turn - +1 Speak
DO any dance to symbolize what you are reading - +1 Speak each time
Every time u make me laugh - +1 Speak
Make jaden or drake references - +1 Speak
also its online debate so rip
just have fun
Caddo Magnet 22'
email chain: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Please keep camera on at all time. Online debate is already depressing enough please have camera on.
- I will disclose my decision after round. Just give me a few minutes. Please ask questions.
- please don't thank me for judging in your rebuttals
I will listen to any argument. I will not vote on racism good. Debate doesn't have rules -- but follow speech times and orders. Those shouldn't be debated on. At the end of the day I care very little about what you read it is just how you present it.
Tech over truth, speak as fast as you want I do not care as long as you're clear. I prefer to listen to a policy debate but I am willing to hear other debates. If you are unclear I will say "Clear" three times before stop flowing. Whatever argument you are best at running, run it, and you are most likely to win.
tech > truth, few exceptions.
Good Line by Line will win you the round
Evidence quality matter a lot. I do read evidence after the round, and I see too often debaters power tagging entire arguments and getting a way with it. If the argument is dumb call it out. If you want me to read certain pieces of evidence after the round say it in speeches.
Better for policy oriented arguments, but enjoy good kritikal debating.
Topicallity- I have changed my views on T. Go for it I like it now. I think T-enact is a killer.
Kritks: I have run Ks in the past. I love a good K debate. Links to the affirmative are the most persuasive to me. Other links are fine If you are not going for the alternative, you should win framework. If the framework page gets too messy don't expect me to do the work for you. buzzword buzzword vote neg because buzzword makes no sense most of the time. I am familiar with these literature bases: Settler Colonialism, Security, Anti-Blackness,Virilio, Capitalism, but does not mean I will do more work or have a preference toward those kritiks. If you know your kritik then there should be no problem winning.
Framework: Debate is a game, but that is up to interpretation. Fairness is an impact. I like fairness as an impact if you care about that. I think affirmative teams need a clear reason for being untopical or rejecting the resolution. K aff v Ks are very interesting when done properly. If you can't do that then run framework. The 2NR shouldn't be five minutes of fairness comes before their arguments. Answer what the other team is saying.
CP: I love a good CP debate. I can be convinced by any theory here. Unless it's condo its most likely a reason to reject the arg not the team.
DA: Easiest way to get my my ballot would be a CP/DA debate. The best of the debates are with good impact calculus and resolved with good impact cal. Yes on impact turns.
Be respectful to your opponent and you will get higher speaks.
DM on discord Rhino#6155 if you a have questions.
- I end up judging lots of LD rounds. I have never done LD only judged rounds on it. I am best suited for LARP and K args. Anything outside of that I am probably not the best judge for you. I can handle a theory debate, but most things beyond that I am not sure.
- I don't know your topic.
Read my policy paradigm. I view LD as 1v1 policy.
RVIs are dumb. I don't like voting on them.
LD disclosure is good, but its is discord tournament where the topic is a few months old. If you're not ready to debate because of disclosure then its sad. A good debater should be prepared to hit any argument and win it. I don't like voting on this when there isn't clear abuse in round.
just do impact cal
I will be honest. I don't like judging this event. That just means I have a bad experience with people I am judging. Read my policy paradigm and do impact cal. Whoever has the biggest impact and can articulate will probably win.