City of Trees
2020 — NSDA Campus, ID/US
Lincoln Douglas Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideNo spreading, be respectful, please give sign posts :)
I look for a clearly stated, logical argument with clash. Signposts along the way. I appreciate your giving clearly stated voters.
Clear, concise, and logical arguments. Please be respectful while still being competitive. I do not like spreading.
Logical Progression
I want to see an argument presented then linked with supporting evidence. Effective rebuttal of one's opponent is also key to maintaining one's own arguments. I am less concerned with the lingo of flows: if your counter-argument is persuasive it should speak for itself.
I prefer a slower debate. I think it allows for a more involved, persuasive and all-around better style of speaking and debating. It is your burden to make sure that your speech is clear and understandable; the faster you want to speak, the more clearly you must speak.
Being aggressive is fine, just make sure you don't say or do anything that is offensive.
Overall, have fun, it's your debate.
My name is Zacharyah, I use they/them pronouns. I am a tabs judge, I’m comfortable judging any argument so long as it’s executed well. Run your stuff, do the line by line, am have fun! I’ll break down my philosophy per argument.
Experience: Centennial High School Policy 4 years (4 bids to TOC). Arizona State- 1 year.
Include me in the email chain: zacharyahharbauer@gmail.com
Case: Case debates are incredibly important to me. Never forget that the 1AC happened and attack the case. Line by line is extremely helpful for me, try to stick with it to earn speaker pints
DA: tell the story of the disad. Have specific links and strong internal links. Uniqueness can overwhelm the link. I’ve yet to vote on the Trump base disad and I have a difficult time seeing myself ever voting for it. Not saying it’s impossjble, just an uphill battle.
CP: prepare to defend the theoretical implications of the argument. Cross-x is binding when it comes to conditionality
K: try to link to the aff in some way. Run your weird stuff if you want, just keep the flow clean
K Aff: run whatever. Don’t need a plan text to win my vote but framework can change that
Framwwoek: love it. I’m just as likely to vote for a k of few as I am to vote for fw proper.
Topicality: I love this argument. It needs to be well developed. If you’re going for it I’m the 2’r it should be all you go for. Default to competing interpretations
Theory: don’t speed through this.
Speaker points: I look to give speaker points to people who maintain a line by line, enunciate clearly, compare warrants within evidence, don’t drop anything, overviews at the beginning of the speech. Those are some of the things I look for
tldr; execute your stuff. I flow by paper so be mindful of what you’re speed through. I’ll call for evidence after round. Have fun!
I'm a flow judge. You should signpost well, but speed is fine. Tell me beyond just evidence why you've won the debate. Give clear voters.
And don't be rude(:
I have some experience judging debate and was also a debater in high school, albeit that has been some time ago. I have both judged and participated in LD and PF. I also have one child who has participated in "congress" "LD" and "PF." I do know what to look for and what a debate should look like.
I appreciate civility during the debate and being respectful. I ask that you speak clearly and not so fast that I miss something.
I will flow the arguments and take notes so that I can keep track of each of your arguments.
Be aware of how you are speaking and conducting yourself. There is a lot of value in telling me precisely why your evidence is better than your opponents. If you can provide some unique analysis that provides an impact or is especially persuasive, than you've done a great job.
I will not determine a winner based upon any personal preference about the resolution or the debater, but will base my decision on the strength of the arguments presented and refuted. If an argument is flawed, and the opponent does not refute it, the argument will stand. I will evaluate which team better upheld their main argument with evidence and reasoning; which team was more persuasive; which team provided the most effective synthesis/closing statement; and which team provided the best criteria for me to make a decision.
Who am I:
This is my 9th year as the head speech and debate coach.
Here's the best way to earn my ballot for any type of debate:
1) Win the flow. If you drop an issue in a speech, do not bring it back up. In PF, dropped arguments are technically ok. Just make sure to communicate to me on why that is good/bad/unimportant that an argument was dropped.
2) Impact out what you win on the flow. I don't care if your opponent clean concedes an argument that you extend through every speech if you don't tell me why I should care.
3) Weigh your impacts! This is a great way to win the ballot with me.
3) Clash with your opponent. Just because you put 5 attacks on an argument doesn't mean it has been dealt with if your attacks have no direct clash with the argument. If you are making an outweigh argument, tell me and I can evaluate it as such!
4) Courtesy. If you are not kind, courteous, and ethical to your opponent, you will receive lower speaker points. I believe that debaters should be able to win on the flow and do so in a kind and professional manner. If the round is extremely close, I often use courtesy and ethics as a tiebreaker.
5) Speed: I think that it's easier to have a cleaner debate when it is slower.
LD DEBATE:
Value/Value Criterions
I think these are necessary in LD debate. I am a more traditional LD debate. Make sure to use your V/CR throughout the round. These are usually a large voting issue for me, so make sure I know why you've won on these issues.
K's/Theory
I prefer traditional LD debate, with a focus on values and value criterions.
Speed: I think that it's easier to have a cleaner debate when it is slower.
Calling for evidence will use prep time. Ensure you need it and that you are willing to use prep time before you ask to see evidence. I will only call for evidence that is contended throughout the round, with that being said if you want me to call for evidence, tell me to call for it and what is wrong with it so I don't have to throw my own judgement in.
Any other questions, ask me in round!
Introduction
Hey everybody :) My name is Victoria and I am currently at Boise State University studying Psychology, Economics, and a bit of Criminal Justice. I am working towards getting into law school. I debated for Timberline High School starting in my sophomore year and ending during my senior year, so I haven't been off the circuit for too long. I primarily was an LD debater, but I have also had competitive experience in Policy, Big Questions, and Congress. I have competed in both the Idaho and Washington circuits, so I have been exposed to and argued against progressive arguments.
Speaks/Spreading
My first impression of you as a debater is your speaking ability. While this will not hold any real weight on who I vote for, I firmly believe that the way you speak is a great skill to take away from Speech and Debate, and thus I will reward you as such. I do not give away 30's easily, especially since speaker points can be the deciding factor of which debater gets to go to break rounds. That being said, spreading is completely fine with me. However, it is a gamble, because if your speed hinders your clarity you will lose points.
K's and Progressive Arguments
Go for it. I love watching a K in action, especially when it is done well. I am good with K's, Counter Plans, Counter Advocacies, and strange framework. Though I will warn you: A poorly done progressive argument will almost always lose in my book. So tread lightly. In your off time roadmap, please let me know what kind of argument your running so I can flow it accordingly.
Flow
I will take notes and flow your speeches as the debate goes on. I prefer both an off-time roadmap and clear signposting so I can do my best to write down all of your arguments in the correct places. If I don't know where an argument/rebuttal goes on the flow, chances are I won't write it down. I will not vote on new arguments brought up after the constructive speeches. Like if you bring up a brand new random contention out of no where in the 2AR, I will not evaluate it for voting purposes. CX is your time, so I will not write down any arguments made in CX unless they are brought up in the following speech.
Ethics
I refuse to accept any arguments promoting and defending racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, or any other derogatory subject. If you run an argument that supports any of these ideas, you are extremely likely to lose. The debate community is a welcoming family and I will not tolerate blatant discrimination. Please be nice to your opponent(s) and treat each other with respect. Debate is a fun, wonderful experience. Let's keep it that way :)
I am so happy you all get to experience this wonderful sport. I love this activity so much, and I am thrilled to serve as a judge for it. Good luck everybody!
If you have any questions please email me at victoria.mort23@gmail.com
My name is Kasey and I'm a senior at Whitman College competing in parliamentary debate.
Background: 4 years of high school LD, Idaho circuit.
Speaking Preferences
If you want to talk fast, go for it! – with a few warnings. Online platforms are sometimes not good for clarity, so keep that in mind. If I am unable to make out your argument, I will ask you to slow down, and if your opponent is unable to understand, I ask them to do the same. if your opponent continually asks you to slow or clear and you don't, consider the round lost right there. access comes first, always.
Things I wholeheartedly love: signposting and brief off-time roadmaps. make it easy for me to know where you are, please.
Argument Preferences
You can throw pretty much any argument at me and I'll flow it. If I can tell you're running a progressive argument or speaking super quickly just to make your opponent uncomfortable (or you know they won't be able to handle it), we will have a problem. If you want to run something off the wall, you can, but if you are unsure if your opponent is familiar with those kinds of arguments, I just ask you to ask. It's something small we all can do to prioritize education in this space without alienating other debaters. Access first, always.
Warrant, don't forget impact calc,use your framework. I will listen to everything.
---
We might frame debate as just a game, but what's said in this space can have very real, very tangible impacts on the well-being of others. Don't forget that.
if you're not having fun I'm convinced you're doing debate wrong :)
Hey everyone! Im Ethane, my pronouns are He/Him, and I am a previous 4 year Policy debater. I absolutely love critical and progressive arguments. There is two things that come with that though: 1) My strong suit was never Kritiks but I still was amazed by them and researched them all the time; and 2) If you want to run progressive and critical arguments, be confident in running them. If you do not feel that you have the ability to explain the nuances of the prog args, effectively link it and impact weigh the arg, then dont waste the time and go for more comfortable arguments. (For a quick summary, im default policy judge but you can run prog stuff) Also, if we were in a physical tournament, I would say I would not mind speed, but we are on an online format and speed can get lost in the wind. With that in mind, go slow with your speaking that way I and your opponent can understand you
I do flow, however I dont just evaluate the round on the flow. I factor clear voters in the rebuttals since that should be the real kicker of the round. To really get me to vote for your side: Use the flow to your advantage and show why you are winning in your final speech.
In LD, I really really (and I mean really) want to see how your criterion can not only uphold your value but also why your value is better upheld on your side. That seems obvious enough in LD, but too many debaters go all hot shot progressive with their arguments but ultimately fail at what LD should be. This should give you that hint: DO NOT GO PROGRESSIVE IN LD.
In PF, your resolution analysis is very important to me. I need to see why you guys are debating this and what is the context here. Thats pretty much it when it comes to PF for me
Feel free to ask me any questions in the round! Good luck
I am an assistant coach with ten years of experience judging debate.
I will judge on the flow and am open to most kinds of arguments. Make sure you connect the dots (tell me how it connects to your case). I am fine with speed, although sometimes speakers are not as clear as they think they are.
Although I like lots of clash, please clash politely with your opponents. I want to hear you address your opponent’s arguments meaningfully. Tell me why winning dropped arguments wins the debate for you. Give me the impact of those dropped arguments.
For LD, know and understand your arguments. Then explain and link them to your value and criterion for me.
I want you to give me clear, impactful voters. Why did you win?
Have fun!