I'm more of a traditional judge if anything, but if you run something wild, and it's done well and you outweigh your opponent, I have a good chance of running with it. It's highly unlikely that I'll vote on a kritik, PIC, or genuinely most forms of theory, but if you execute it well, go for it. I will *not* vote on the multiverse/alternate reality argument.

Don't be rude. Avoid interrupting speeches, cross examinations, insulting people, disrespecting pronouns, or just disrespecting people in general. It's not cool and it won't do you any favors.

Voters and weighing are very important to me, it makes or breaks a round. Speak clearly and enunciate, I don't care of you spread, but if I don't understand you, I don't understand you. If you confuse your judge along with your opponent, it's not a benefit. Make sure you remember to extend your points and signpost.

Good luck and make sure you have fun :)

Joe Rankin

Bettendorf High School

jrankin@bettendorf.k12.ia.us

UPDATED: October 4th, 2022

I'm not sure what happened to my previous Paradigm that was posted, but it appears to have been erased/lost. My apologies as I just learned of this at the Simpson Storm tournament (Sat, Oct 1, 2022) this past weekend.

My name is Joe Rankin and I am the head coach at Bettendorf High School in Bettendorf, IA. I have been the head coach at Bettendorf since the 2005-2006 school year. I primarily coach Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Public Forum Debate, Congressional Debate, and Extemporaneous Speaking...however, I am familiar and have coached all NSDA sanctioned speech/debate events over my time at Bettendorf.

In terms of my coaching paradigm, I'd generally consider these the 'highlights:'

1. I prefer topical debate. The resolution was voted on by coaches and students through the NSDA voting process. That's what I want to hear about.
2. I can generally handle 'speed,' but that doesn't mean I enjoy it. I'd rather help you develop skills that you will actually utilize interacting with other human beings outside of this one particular subset of existence - so I'd much prefer a rate that is more akin to real-world applications.
3. You can make whatever arguments you want to make...but I generally haven't voted on many things associating with theory, kritiks (or however you want to misspell the word critique), or other generally non-topical arguments you make in the round. It takes more work for me to believe those types of arguments are true and not a whole lot of work to make me believe those types of arguments are generally false. So, I wouldn't encourage this type of argumentation in front of me.

I figure that is sufficient for now. If you have any questions, I tend to give you that window before the round begins while setting up to judge. If not, please feel free to ask before the round. The end goal of the round for me is a competitive academic environment that is focused on education. I don't mind answering questions that will help all of us improve moving forward.