Last changed on
Sat December 12, 2020 at 4:44 AM CDT
Colleyville Heritage High School 2014
Affirmatives should be topical or related to the topic at the very least. I prioritize technical concessions over truth. Dropped arguments stay true throughout entire debate. Speaker points generally range between 28.5-29.5.
Counterplans: CPs should be functionally and textually competitive. I like case-specific CPs (especially PICs), not huge fan of consult / conditions CPs. I will kick the CP and evaluate the status quo on its own unless told not to by the aff.
Disadvantages: Absolute defense is possible.
Kritiks: I ran mostly policy arguments so explanation is essential. I usually default to weighing the aff on framework. Negatives should explain what the alternative does. Affs should impact turn as opposed to link turn if more strategic option. Cap good, hegemony good are arguments and need to be answered.
Theory: I usually reject arguments and not teams unless dropped / seriously mishandled. Conditional advocacies good.
Topicality: I usually default to competing interpretations but there are good reasons to prefer reasonability. Topicality not reverse voting issue.
More context:
Kelly Cody: https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?judge_person_id=11629
Lydia Lee: https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?judge_person_id=28408