Last changed on
Thu January 25, 2024 at 5:57 AM PDT
I will try to disclose and provide an rfd unless the tournament is adamantly against it.
3 years of high school public forum debate (both 1st and 2nd speaker) experience in Washington State.
PF:
TRUTH>TECH. Just because you say the sky is green and your opponents don't respond doesn't mean the sky is green (I will try not to intervene too much).
Consider me a flow judge but keep in mind I am debating in a pretty lay high school circuit (and I competed at a couple national circuit tournaments) and I'm a pretty traditional PF debater. I try not to bring in topic knowledge/judge intervention.
Make sure to signpost (tell me what arguments you are addressing), I am fine with off-time roadmaps (nothing over 5 seconds).
I like clash in debate. In order to win the clash on an argument, you need to either explain to me why your evidence is better, or why your logic is better. Simply saying "they say this", "we say this" is not enough for me to vote for you on this clash, you need to do a comparison. Again, simply saying "their evidence says this", "ours says this" is not enough.
I will flow progressive arguments (theory, Ks, etc.), but my threshold of understanding is probably low, and please tell me before the round or before your speech if you are going to run any of the progressive arguments listed above.
Be respectful, I’ll drop teams for being racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, etc. and report to tab.
"PF speed" is fine as long as you enunciate. Do not spread, I will stop flowing if you are going too fast. If it's not on my flow, I will not vote on it.
I am okay with debate jargon (delink, turn, nonunique, etc.), if you are going to run progressive arguments, again my threshold for understanding and jargon will be low.
Do not run an abusive framework. If the other team does not respond to it, I will flow it through, but probably drop your speaks.
DO NOT BE RUDE TO YOUR OPPONENTS. If I feel you are being too condescending or not letting your opponents talk, I will either deduct speaker points or I will drop the debater (if it's really bad). With that being said, I will not penalize you for asking follow-up questions. I will not be flowing crossfire (I will be paying somewhat attention for speaker points), if you want it on my flow, bring it up in the next speech.
DO NOT CONTINUE READING YOUR CASE IF YOU DIDN'T FINISH IN THE FIRST 4 MINUTES.
First rebuttal: Try to spend all 4 minutes refuting your opponent's case (I dislike it when teams spend a lot of time "rebuilding their case"). If you run out of stuff to say, weigh the debate.
Second rebuttal: You need to frontline. By frontline, I do not mean extending your argument, I need you to actually respond to your opponents' refutations. I will only vote on offense in the round, so if you concede defense, it will not count for the other team.
First summary: You definitely need to frontline. If you concede defense on an argument, it makes it much harder for me to vote for you on that argument. If you are dropping an argument, conceding defense is fine, do not concede turns if you are dropping an argument though. Be strategic with your time. You also need to weigh the debate, tell me why your impacts are more important than your opponents.
Second summary: Pretty much same thing as first summary. New weighing is allowed, but no new arguments, you can make new implications of arguments as long as it isn't super abusive.
For me, probability weighing is more important than magnitude. DO NOT IMPACT EVERY ARGUMENT OUT TO NUKE WAR. If you don't do the weighing, I will do the weighing. I will try not to intervene as a judge, but I would prefer if the debaters did the weighing.
Do not try to cover the entire flow. Go for voters, which are reasons why I should vote for you. Make the speech organized. A teammate once told me, the final focus is the speech you give to your team after the round complaining why you should have won.
Do not make new arguments, this includes no new weighing (weigh in summary, extend the weighing in final focus). If you blatantly lie in second final focus because your opponents can't respond to it, I will dock speaks and not count it on the flow.
+1 speaker points for both competitors on your team if you start your FF with this:
This round comes down to two worlds. One world is the world of the aff, that is the world in which (insert resolution, ex. The world in which the U.S increases diplomatic efforts in West Asia). The other world is the world of the neg, that is the status quo. What we would argue is that the (insert your side) world is comparatively better for (insert number of voters) key reasons.
I will vote off the flow. Speaker points are awarded based on how fluent your speech is (not a whole lot of ums and stuttering), and also based on strategic decisions made in round. I will try to give high speaker points when I can.
Just ask me in round if you have any more specific paradigm questions.
