I want to be on all evidence and file sharing email chains. (Briggsc24@stlukesct.org)

TLDR: My paradigm isn't that long but I'll evaluate everything just do it well ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

General

I was a HS policy K debater so I will evaluate everything, Ks, theory etc. Speed is good so go as fast as you want just be clear. Don't spread faster than you can because bad spreading sucks so don't be bad at it.

Other than that I don't really care what you run I will evaluate it regardless of what the rest of my paradigm says.

If you have any questions about my RFD ask me. If there is no round disclosure at the tournament I probably will disclose anyway just don't tell tab <3.

For in round stuff (for policy, open cx that kind of thing) do whatever you want as long as the other team agrees.

All of this is for whatever event I am judging. The rest of my paradigm is just my personal thoughts on some arguments to let you know where I personally stand even though it will not impact my decision.

Theory

I'll evaluate it just do it right.

Tricks are for kids. That being said, I am a kid.

Theory - CX

If you run ks bad, cps bad, or try to convince me that ks and cps as a whole are abusive or don't belong in the space I will evaluate it but the burden on negative team is low, it's not the 70s. Go to open ev, do research, get good. (Obviously there are some CPs that are actually abusive thats a different story) I just generally hate this theory but I guess I'll evaluate it.

T-T is a theory you need all the parts.

CX - General

KAFFS -I love them. I ran one my senior year and loved it. I don't have any major opinions about kaffs but I do believe they have a space in the activity. That being said I will vote on framework. I don't really think that fairness is a voter I think it is an internal link but I could be wrong and will vote on it being an impact.

KVK- Please do this. I love kvks I think they are awesome and probably the most interesting debates I've seen.

K-the previous 2 sections should tell you enough but I love them

PF

I probably have a fair amount of knowledge of whatever topic you all are doing and I would like to be on ev share, whatever that looks like.

K- It belongs in PF just don't suck at it

For novice, you probably shouldn't be running prog anyways but if you know what you're doing go nuts.

PF:

TLDR: Hi I'm Dash! I'm a Junior debater for St. Luke's GG. I'm pretty laid-back so if you have preferences for how the round should run you can tell me. Tech over truth, tab, etc. Run whatever you like to run. if you have any questions please ask. I'm a good judge for progressive arguments. Add me to the chain @ gilrain-lennond25stlukesct.org

Non-negotiables:

Respect your opponents and their identities

Don't be cruel, offensive, or generally a bad person

Strike me if you don't have cut cards, otherwise I'll treat your argument like an analytic

I'm fine with speed. Send a speech doc, if you're super unclear I might "clear" yo

Weighing: Do it. Tell me what order to evaluate the offense in the round in, if teams agree on weighing mechanisms tell me why your link/impact is better comparatively.

Cross - I won't flow cross but I'll pay attention, if something is important bring it up in speech

Progressive Arguments- run whatever, judge instruction is a good idea.

Judging stuff:

I start speaks at a 28.5 or like a 28.8 if you have rly good evidence ethics

I'll disclose the decision, if you have any questions please feel free to ask

you can postround me if you want

High speaks for Good signposting, speech docs, and disclosure, a good strategic collapse, being funny, Comparative weighing, A well-used framework

Low Speaks forPrep stealing, paraphrasing, taking forever to send evidence (can be avoided by sending speech docs, just saying), Extending 10,000 pieces of offense without telling me how to evaluate them.

Rankings:

Good ev good warrant > Bad ev good warrant > Good ev bad warrant > bad response

Coffee > Monster > Red Bull> Other energy drink

Cool People

- Samantha Gerber

Extemporaneous Policy Debate

-I appreciate humor and I will laugh at your jokes

-Don't call your opponents racist (can't believe I have to say that )

-Clash is important and addressing your opponents refutations

-NO NEW ARGUMENTS IN YOUR LAST SPEECH (I will not flow new arguments)

-Don't be monotone

-You should ask at least 3 questions during cross ex

-In your rebuttal, tell me why you win and your opponents' arguments fall flat

-Please be civil, I do not tolerate overate aggression. There is a difference between being firm and being a rude

-Fill time in for cross ex, if you don't that's an automatic loss

-No abusive definitions

-If a question takes longer than 20 seconds to ask, you probably shouldn't ask it

-Please do not use parli jargon when debating

Parliamentary Debate

-Stress impacts

-Allow a POI once or twice

-Weigh

-Don't call your opponents racist

Public Forum Debate/Lincoln Douglass

-I do not tolerate anyone calling their opponents racist, if you do that, you will get substantially lower speaker scores

-Speak at a level of comprehension

-No spreading under any circumstance

-Do not be monotone