Digital Speech and Debate e Championship
2023 — NSDA Campus, US
LD - Varsity Paradigm ListAll Paradigms: Show Hide
I’m in my 15th year as a history teacher and 2nd year as a Debate sponsor/coach of our up-and-coming Debate program at MAST@FIU BBC Campus. I have a BA in International Relations from the University of Pennsylvania, a Master’s in History from Florida International University and am currently working on my PhD in History. I have judged in a state tournament, local tournaments, and some online scrimmage events.
I’m open to whatever kind of position you want to use in the debate. I prefer clear roadmaps and explanations. I do not prefer, however, radical Kritiks and spreading.
I like to take notes/flow. I do not prefer excessive speed.
I avoid giving 30s except for a truly exceptional performance. I use speaker points as rank.
I am most familiar with Lincoln-Douglas though on occasion have judged PF and Congress. Please explain jargon.
- No trix please. I probably won't catch them or understand them.
- Explain K's well to me. I'm not familiar with the lit.
- I err T, I'll vote on Topicality.
- Please explain Theory well.
- Plans are ok, just explain them well. Make sure your links/internal-links are clear.
Please email speech docs to: email@example.com
TLDR; Flay judge; did policy debate at the national level back in college (this was a REALLY long time ago), so treat me as somebody who mostly has no idea what you are talking about, I'm not up to date on the current policy meta.
Tech>truth, tabula rasa until you're racist/sexist/homophobic/personally offensive in any way, in which case I will instantly drop you with the lowest speaks possible. Defense is not sticky, weighing in the 2AR is imperative, make sure you extend arguments made in the AC/NC clearly across the flow and signpost well so I can flow you, especially if you're speaking fast. Tell me why cards actually matter instead of just throwing around their names in rebuttal. Trad>circuit debate, give me voters in the NR/2AR, I will try to remain as noninterventionist as possible and eval based off the flow. I look for you to creatively extend your contentions and CPs and think out of the box in your 1AR/2AR, 2NRs, those are interesting for me.
I hate speed, I'm not the best flower and I'll probably drop some of your arguments if you spread. I strongly dislike/don't really understand k affs, kritiks, friv t, and non-topical arguments. Avoid tricks as I wouldn't know what hit me and won't vote you up or down for them.
Go for it. Phil debate is an integral part of LD. I default util in the absence of any framing, but if one side offers framing and the other side does not, I'll evaluate based off of framing presented. Just make sure to keep it understandable and don't throw singular cards from random philosophers around as a complete framework.