Roy Miller High School TFA Tournament
2022 — Corpus Christi, TX/US
Lincoln Douglas Paradigm ListAll Paradigms: Show Hide
Congress-there is 1 speech that should not have debate. After that, anyone reading the same arguments as presented can expect that they aren't as good as the previous speech. Please consider either new arguments for the legislation or debating why the arguments on your side are better. I do not like to interject in rounds. I prefer to watch you debate the issues and explain both sides of the bill for me. Please keep the room moving forward. discuss legislation. make arguments vs reading at me and explain why your side is better. This is relatively simple. I do not want to get bored hearing people read the same things. This is tfa. the best of the nest need to explain arguments, ask good questions that make evryone think. A variety of sources, references to previous speakers and solid arguments preferred. good luck.
General stuff. I don't like to tell people how and what to debate and am pretty open to about anything in ld and policy. I will listen to it, but you need to explain its importance,and why I should vote on it. Not as familiar with all the literature, but that just means you should do a little more explainin. Issues will be weighed using the mechanisms you put forward. In pf do the pf thing. Clear link chains explanations, collapse and weigh.
PF- I try not to be someone who likes some fast talkers but am ok with it. 2 big caveats 1 explain your argument and dont just subpoint the other team to confusion and 2.dont spread for the sake of going fast. I am not thrilled with spreading in pf and find that those rounds have (generally speaking) the worst summary and FF. So again, present case argue opponent collapse case weigh issues. Thanks for your time.
LD- I am traditional unless I am told not to be. I don't care anymore. So be progressive. Whatever. At the end of the day is it beneficial to vote aff or neg. How do I evaluate the arguments up for discussion? This is your burden and that's it. Speed is not an issue but clarity is. I won't tell you if you are unclear. If you havent looked up and noticed my hair getting grayer and you are rattlin away that ain't my fault. As this is a speech event I dont like telling people what to say or how to say it. except as stated above, don't be threatening. It is your voice whether unclear or not. Look up.
POLICY Look, I have voted pretty much on anything absent a god or philosopher king counterplan. Again, do what you do and how you do it. I do have an issue with 8 off when you arent following the speech doc and are skipping things while your partner tells you to skip a card leaving incomplete positions. If you can do 8 complete that's great. I prefer depth of an issue. I think it's best for learning, but you can strategize as you wish. I am not getting into the tech v truth or t standards discussions because I am not sure why you can't tell me what matters more. This is a game we play and for me to set hard and fast rules doesn't make sense. I guess years of debating standards and judging those debates makes me less likely to tell you which is better in about anything. So debate. Have fun. read the top paragraph. see you on the trail.
WILLING TO DISCUSS WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE PRE ROUND. Once the bell rings and the round is going there are no questions for me. no idea how many years I have been judging, but a bunch. Have fun.
I prefer a blend of slow and rapid conversation speed. The rate of delivery does not weigh heavily on my decision. I will not vote against a student solely for exceeding my preferred speed. Considerations in determining a winner are structure of the argument, framework level argumentation, and offense back to the standard. I feel that a value and criterion are required elements of a case. The use or jargon or technical language during rebuttal should be kept to a minimum. I keep detailed notes throughout the round. I encourage open and professional interaction while discouraging emotional outbursts and rude behavior. Who persuades me more of their position will be most successful.
Debate: I am good with speed on reading evidence & delivering arguments. I am familiar with all types of arguments: T, DA, CP, K, Value/Criterion, Theory. It is important to me all arguments I flowed, have a rebuttal from opposing team.
Speech (Exempt): I expect at minimum one source sited for each main component of your speech.
I competed in LD, Policy and Public forum my 4 years of high school and competed at both the state level and national level. I have been judging since fall of 2016, at the state and national level. I have also judged finals at NSDA nationals in policy debate last summer.
For email chain: AngelaWinn1997@gmail.com,I will only look at it, if something comes into question or if I want to look at something more clearly.
Policy Debate: If debaters have any questions, please ask! I have judged at nationals 4 times
Clash is extremally important on all sides of the debate. If something was drop in the round I will not vote on it unless it is pointed out in the round. As for things I vote on, it depends on the round and how the debater frame the round. I will vote on pretty much anything as long as the debaters explain clearly what they are arguing and how it links. If you run a K, need to be able to explain it in your own words, as well as links and impacts are important.
For spreading, I am fine with it, as long as you slow down on taglines.
Framework ( Value/Criterion) is important, but so is the contention level debate. I way both sides when writing a ballot. I think LD is primarily a philosophical debate. You do not have to prove how something will be done just that it should be done. Saying that , claims of impacts should be supported with evidence or reasonable logic.
Be careful with your terminology I am an experienced coach and I know the difference between a disad and a solvency issue.
Be careful if you are going super progressive. I firmly believe you should “Debatethe resolution”,not some random issue that you feel is more important. The entire Speech and Debate community voted on theses resolutions, so if you think you know better, you should provide a very good reason.
I appreciate creativity in your arguments, but stick with the resolution.
Policy - Although I am typically a more conservative (i.e. Stock issues) judge I am open to all forms of debate argumwents . I vote predominantly on clash and impact. Stock issues are a must and that includes topicality.
If you make arguments they must be linkked to your opponents case. If the link iis weak, it is going to be harder to win your argument if your opponent points that out. Extend your arguments thruout rebutttals and that inludes the Affirmative case.
I am OK with K's as long as you provide a viable link to your opponents case. See previous comment regarding links.
I am ok with speed as long as I can understand you. dont yell at me and dont wisper eithe. I f I cant understand you I dont folw you. If I don't flow the argument, it never happened.