Verdigris End of Season Invitational
2021
—
NSDA Campus,
OK/US
Policy Paradigm List
All Paradigms:
Show
Hide
Jody Batie
Haskell High School
None
Catherine Blair
Mannford High School
8 rounds
None
Stormy Howell
Okmulgee High School
None
Nathan Hughes
Keys High School
Last changed on
Fri January 26, 2024 at 11:09 AM CDT
A brief background: I was a competitor for four years at Keys High School. I participated in Policy debate between 2009-2012 and along with my partner was the State Champion in the 4A Division in 2012. I have also medaled at State in Standard Oratory and Foreign Extemp. He/Him
Extemp: The most important thing to me is that your speech is constructed well; I will vote for a well-organized speech with sub-par delivery over a well-delivered speech that seems to be written haphazardly. Having a solid preview-> view -> review structure tends to help with this. I like it when speakers clearly tie the introductions to their speeches to the main topic they will be talking about, and give a satisfying conclusion after their review. Signposting with phrases like "Now, onto my second point..." helps make it clear which of your points you are talking about. I also like it when speakers make a clear distinction between information that is cited evidence and information is their own analysis. Please tell me if you want your time signals going up (I show you how many minutes you have used) or going down (I show you how many minutes you have left).
CX: I lean towards being a Policymaker judge, meaning I look at the world both teams present to me and vote for the world I would more like to live in. That being said, I vote for what I see in the round and I like it when teams tell me the issues I should be voting on in the rebuttals. I don't handle spreading as well as some other judges and prefer it if speakers slow down at least for the slugs and citations on their cards. Brief roadmaps and good signposting (e.g. "Now, onto the topicality...") helps me flow and will make it much easier to vote for you. I appreciate it when arguments are well-organized and clear to understand. I am open to kritikal and theory-based arguments but will find it easier to vote for these things if you do a good job of convincing me why I should vote for them in your rebuttal speeches.
LD and other debate formats I am less familiar with but still appreciate when competitors clearly line out voting issues and give me solid reasons to vote for them in their rebuttal speeches.
Feel free to ask if you have any specific questions before the round. Competing is tough under normal circumstances and is made even more frustrating when having to deal with technology-based issues. Good luck!
Kandace Johnson
Okmulgee High School
None
Ryan King
Haskell High School
8 rounds
None
Deleea Meeker
Verdigris High School
Last changed on
Tue June 16, 2020 at 4:48 AM CDT
CX-
Stock Issues
Make sure taglines are clear
Do not spread too fast - evidence matters and I need to hear it to understand your case
Do not like topicality arguments-fine to mention if you feel argument is non-topical, however do not waste excessive time and allow judge to determine if the argument is or is not topical.
Do your best to present on case arguments. If Neg ignores the AFF and presents only generic attacks, you will lose points, please debate the AFFs case.
If you run a K or counter plan, make sure you do you fully vet and present your arguments. These options require more convincing.
Prefer you not to go nuclear unless it is necessary.
William Phillips
Regent Preparatory School
None
Zak Rajpari
Keys High School
Last changed on
Fri February 4, 2022 at 11:45 AM CDT
Debated CX and LD in high school, 2006-2010. Debated Parli 2011-2015. Had some success in both spheres. Am a bit rusty with higher levels of debate but can probably keep up in most rounds.
I'm a lazy judge and want to vote on the easiest way to pull the trigger at the end of the round. The best way to get there is with obvious offense and impact calc/cost benefit/some sort of weighing at the end of the round.
I'm open to any kinds of arguments including K and procedurals.
I do my best to judge based on what happened on the flow, but that is with the expectation that arguments have substance.
Please differentiate between cards and tags! Use AND or NEXT or something like that.
Curtis Schmidt
Verdigris High School
None
Skyleen Willingham
Okmulgee High School
None