Last changed on
Fri January 26, 2024 at 9:11 AM MST
For some background on me. I did debate for 3 years in high school. I dabbled in Extemp and PF, but I mainly did LD the whole time and was reasonably successful in it. I graduated in 2020. I am currently a history major at USU.
I can follow spreading, K, and theory, but I am not well-versed in it. I generally prefer traditional debate.
Questions Policy Debaters always ask me:
yes, I do allow for tag-team/open cross ex
no, I do not flow cross ex
put me on the email chain. I don't want to use flash drives. skmayers@gmail.com. please do not abuse access to my email.
General
tech and truth, probably heavier on the truth.
biggest takeaway: nothing is true until you tell me it is true. I don't have to evaluate theory before case unless you tell me I do and you explain why. these explanations don't have to be long, but don't assume I understand the arbitrary "rules" you have invented in your head for debate. this goes for all arguments, not just framework. If I need to argue evidenced arguments over non-evidenced arguments, tell me why, etc. emphasis on Tell Me Why
if no analysis is given by either side, I default to theory>framework>kritik>case>. I am telling you this for the sake of transparency, not because that is how I think you have to debate.
Ethics
Here are some ethical issues that will probably get you dropped automatically
- falsifying evidence
- being racist, transphobic, or otherwise making the round an unsafe place.
Here are some ethical issues that I don't like, but aren't a deal-breaker
- spreading. We all know this makes the round inaccessible, even if no one has written a good K for it
- being rude in CX. interrupting, not giving clear answers, etc
- using inaccessible language and not defining genre-specific terms
- any kind of blatant trauma porn
- PICs
remember debate does not exist in a vacuum, your opponent and I are both real, living people, who will walk out of the round impacted by the things that are said, for good or bad. This impact goes for both the things you debate about and the way in which you discuss them.
Argument
here are some things that I love to see :)
- Linking back to framework. Remember, your impacts only matter if you link them to a value system that says that they matter
- Well-organized points. I want to be able to flow and group your arguments easily
- I think performance Ks are super fun, and honestly think they should be used more, but make sure you have really solid framing.
- solid plan implication, a good picture of what the post-fiat world looks like. You don't need to have an itemized budget but I would like to know what I am voting for
- being able to give information about your authors and source in CX (publication details, methodology, education, etc)
- really unique contentions/arguments.
- well-run theory. honestly any theory at all, but obviously don't use it if the round doesn't actually call for it. I think theory arguments are super interesting and can add a lot to debate if used appropriately
here are some things that I hate to see :(
- dropping/kicking out of arguments
- contentions with multiple arguments that don't really go together
- lack of evidence/authors
- ignoring your opponent's claims/ lack of clash
- Saying "they basically didn't address this argument" when they definitely did. remember that I am flowing too.
- when I can tell that someone definitely wrote your case for you, and you don't really understand it personally
Presentation
- please be clear on taglines/headings, make it easy for both me and your opponent to flow
- I love confidence
- make sure you don't rely too much on a showy, confident presentation. I want content too.
overall, just try to make the round enjoyable, educational, and fair for all parties involved, including yourself :)
