Last changed on
Mon November 27, 2023 at 7:37 AM EDT
Hi!
Add me to the chain :) Oliviasweeten6580@gmail.com
QUICK PREFS
5
spreading (makes judging hard. I'm here for a good time not a long time), friv or heavy theory, tricks (will evaluate under views only - makes lbl hard to follow and usually requires spreading to do which idc for)
1-2
trad/lay,larp,Deleuze and Guattari/POMO, decent amount of common K lit,PICS/CP, phil, REAL ABUSE THEORY not some random mumbo jumbo, psychoanalysis K
3-4
id pol or dense K lit like racial cap (just don't have a lot of experience with these and I can get lost)
random for qkprfs
My default layering is Theory ≥ ROB > Substance > Presumption
maybe 2ar Hail Mary maybe not
tech≥truth
Order is General Expectations, VLD, Novice LD, PF, and then Speech at the bottom!
GENERAL EXPECTATIONS
Please do not go past your times for over 10 seconds because I will dock your speaker points. If you say anything racist, sexist, homophobic, use the wrong pronouns after being corrected more than once, or make any sort of comments towards the person you are debating to make them uncomfortable or upset you will be held accountable. Your coach and/or tab will be notified. Please don't make me do this. Debate is supposed to be fun and friendly. I don’t tolerate you interrupting their speech to talk over them.
I will run a stop watch to ensure no prep time is stolen or lost and that things run on time.
Yelling doesn't make you sound better and being extremely aggressive doesn't either. Confidence is important in debate but talking so quickly in round that nobody can understand you, speaking so quietly that nobody can hear you, or yelling to where you're incomprehensible, also, won't get you anywhere.
VLD
Tabula Rasa all the way although there are arguments I won't buy if you're being problematic to any group of people which includes everyone. I'm not going to sit there and listen to you tell me why the alt is good when it's literally exterminating able-bodied people or people who believe in a God - lets be serious people.
ID pol ✓ (just be sure to explain afropess/afro opp I never really saw those things in debate so I don't really understand them as well as other things and impact it out)
POMO ✓✓✓✓✓✓✓✓✓ 100% yes (I will be your best friend if you read this unless you read it poorly ???? I will say, however, I'm not sure familiar with Bataille. I mostly read/saw DnG and Baudrillard (I did those actions respectively))
T framework meh
Theory... just please put it in the doc. I can't vote off of what I can't get down/remember
/\ - For any theory type of debate I didn't really do a whole lot of that when I debated so I can assess it but if there are going to be theory debates that are like super layered and confusing I'm not really the judge for that. So, not good for super intensive theory debates that get messy very fast but I can assess regular theory violation shells. I will not, however, buy waterbottle, laptop sticker (unless it is actually bad), or shoe theory.
I like speechdrop, email chain, or tabroom's version of speech drop too. Everything works just let me and your opponent know what you're using and let us join if we ask. Say it with me. ADDING YOUR DOC TO THE EMAIL/SPEECH DROP DOESN'T COUNT AS PREP TIME - THAT IS MEAN. The 15 seconds it took you to attach your doc to the email isn't going to make the tournament run late OMG people.
Extending is a big deal to me. Don't extend your ROB okay... then why does it matter? Don't extend your amazing 1nr/1ar impact calculus showing me why extinction is bad okay... why did you bother doing it in the first place? If you think something is important on the flow TELL ME. I will not judge hack. If you want something to be a key voting issue lay it out for me. There are too many eager judges and lazy debaters who want to rely on what they did well in one speech to magically go into the flow of the next one without having to point it out.
Framework is also a key voting issue for me (depends on type of debate). If you ignore your ROB or FW and just tell me why something is bad without showing me why your FW says its bad or why your opponent doesn't meet your FW then how do I have a way of knowing that 3 million starving children is bad? If you want a tabula rasa judge that means you need to pretend they are a little kid with no knowledge. Give me my morals to operate with.
I will honestly listen to any kind of debate. I'm fine with Ks, POMO, ID pol, theory, lay, policy, etc. I don't vote more one way or the other I just evaluate the round as it is and decide who did better strategically and who overall should have won. My emotions and personal views do not get in the way. I am pretty centrist and don't really believe in politics in general.
NLD
As a (previous, now graduated)varsity debater I'm not expecting varsity level debate like K's, phil debate, T debate (either topical or theory), counter plans or the like, or anything advanced really, so just do what you know how at this point!
Something I've unfortunately seen in even varsity debate is cases that are essays. A case is NO place for your own words except for taglines and even then those are supposed to be describing the card, NOT your opinion on the card. A speech is the only place for your opinion and even then it should be based in moral reasoning with your framework.
Before round, I also recommend reflowing your case so you can write their responses right next to your cards so you know what to address. It makes flowing much easier for your judge and that increases the likelihood that the judge will know to vote for you if they can see what arguments you did and/or did not address.
A basic case should be in this order most of the time:
1. Resolved: TOPIC
2. FRAMEWORK (if you do not have a framework or value and value criterion your case will be weighed under your opponents and you will make it very hard for you to win because I will not point out that you need a framework until after the debate. If you are on the neg this is normal to concede to the affs framework so don't worry about it being difficult to win.)
3. Contention 1
4. Tagline, citation, and then card. This process should be repeated for however many cards in the case.
4. If you have any other contentions then they still need to follow this format but only one contention is absolutely necessary in your case on the aff.
I want to see a debate, not two people giving argumentative speeches… This means come back to your framework, respond to arguments strategically, and respond based on the importance layer.
PF
I've judged one or two PF rounds and only participated in my first year of debate once so I basically know nothing about PF. Please either give me the times so I can know how long to time you for.
SPEECH
I have never done speech but I know what to look for.
- Try to keep the 'um' and 'uh's to a minimum and none if possible
- Try to not move your hands around a lot - keep it to a minimum
- Move slowly between points without turning your back to the judge
- Looking for clear and normal conversation paced speaking
- Try to be funny- if your humor comes at the expense of others I probably won't find it funny.
- Looking for a good AG that is related to the question without actually stating the question in the AG.
- It won't let me delete this one :)