Arr, ye scurvy landlubbers! Gather ‘round the campfire, fer I be spinnin’ ye a yarn 'bout high school debate, pirate-style. So hoist the Jolly Roger, sharpen yer cutlasses, and let’s weigh anchor on this here debate sea!

Title: “The Great Debate Booty Showdown”

Arr, me hearties! Welcome to theHigh School Debate Ship, where young buccaneers clash like thunderin’ cannons over matters grand and trivial. Our topic today: “Be it resolved that treasure maps be replaced with GPS coordinates.” Now, let’s set sail, savvy?

“Avast, ye scallywags! Listen well, for I say this: Treasure maps be as outdated as a barnacle-covered hull. GPS be the compass of the modern age! No more decipherin’ cryptic clues—just follow the blinking dot to yer booty. Arr, progress awaits!”

“Arr, hold yer horses, Corsair! Maps be the soul of adventure! GPS be but a soulless automaton. Where’s the romance in punchin’ numbers into a gadget? Give me parchment, ink, and a quill any day. X marks the spot, and me heart sings!”

“Blackbeard, ye cling to nostalgia like barnacles to a ship. What say ye to lost maps, faded ink, and squintin’ at tiny screens? GPS be precise as a surgeon’s blade!”

“Aye, Corsair, but what of the thrill? The wind in yer hair, the salt spray on yer face? GPS be cold as a dead fish. Maps be tales whispered by the sea herself!”

“Listen, ye landlubbers! GPS be efficient, but maps be magic. They tell stories of buried chests, ghostly pirates, and forbidden coves. Let’s not trade wonder for convenience!”

“Arr, Corsair, ye’ve a point, but maps be our legacy. They be ink-stained dreams, passed down from one generation to the next. GPS? Bah! Give me parchment or give me Davy Jones!”

“Debate judges, me hearties, weigh the scales. Will ye choose the cold precision of GPS or the salty romance of maps? The decision be yers. But remember, whether ye be Corsair or Blackbeard, we’re all pirates sailin’ the same debate seas.”

And there ye have it, me mateys! The Great Debate Booty Showdown—where words be the cannons, and ideas be the treasure. Now, raise yer tankards, sing a shanty, and may the best debater win!

I am a 3rd Year Debater at Hayden High School, I've debated at every level of high school debate from novice to DCI.

Please add me to the email chain: blaserdebate@gmail.com

For novice after-schools:

Have fun! I did a ton of these my freshman year and these tournaments are a great place to practice and get experience. If you want to try something or just figure out how this activity works, I'm glad you are doing this.

Confidence is massive! If you sounds confident it will win you a lot of rounds in novice-land. Make sure to pay attention to how the debate is progressing but never sound like you already lost, because if you aren't, it will probably lower your chances.

Just try to keep the round moving, use your prep, but don't take excessive amounts of time between prep and your speech.

1. Speed: I'm fine with decent speed but make sure you are clear. Clarity>speed but if you can do both go for it. Send analytics if you are going to go super fast but I understand not wanting to send them, I usually don't. But be aware if you are going super fast I might miss some analytics if you don't send them and it could cost you. You do you.
2. Depth>Bredth: explain your arguments. A claim without a warrant is not an argument especially in later rebuttals. I get in the 1AR you don't have a ton of time but to extend an argument I need a warrant. I'm fine with a 1AR spending 15 seconds on something and the 2AR grandstanding on it as long as the 1AR extended the warrant.
3. CPs: Love these. Make sure they are competitive. I'll listen to cheaty CPs but if the aff calls it out I'll also listen to RVIs. Make sure the CP can solve and actually have a net benefit and I'll vote for it. For the aff, winning the disad net benefit is the quickest way to win these debates because no net benefit means I don't vote on the CP.
4. DAs: Love these. Generic DAs are good, but Specific DAs are great. If you have a DA most people don't read but you think is good, that should be your best weapon. The link debate is the most important on DAs.
5. T: I run T in most of my rounds so I am definitely comfortable voting on T. Make sure it has a Interp, violation, standards, and voters. I can't vote on T without voters so make sure to extend those throughout the entire debate.
6. Ks: I'm not the most experienced with Ks but I have read a few in the past. I'm most comfortable with Racial Cap, Biopower, and Necropower. Make sure to clearly articulate your K throughout the round and why it matters. Also make sure to have a strong link to the aff because if the aff says its a generic link and they need a specific one, you better have something specific, even if its analytical. Just explain it in the 2NR and you have a good chance.
7. Case: Bread and butter of debate. I love seeing a good impact turn, and I'll definitely listen to args like dedev. If you take out their offense then you win. Prove a solvency deficit and you win. Many debaters have a good angle to win the case debate in the 2NR and then only use 30 seconds on case. Don't be scared to go for case. I will give a presumption ballot but you have to win terminal defense to the entire case.

Things for overall debate: Don't bring new off-case into the 2NC. Not only will I not vote on it, it will count against you. New case args are fine in the 2NC, as long as you said something on case in the 1NC. I am fine if you barely touch on case in the 1NC and then hammer case in the 2NC. That is great.

I am fine with you timing yourself, I will also be timing you. Don't go over time. I am fine if you finish your sentence, but don't drag it on for 20 seconds, I will not flow new things after the timer.

Also, don't be mean. We are all here to have a good time and learn some things, especially in novice. I understand being assertive and that is actually very good, but

In the end, debate is supposed to be fun. I want this to be fun for everybody.

If you have any questions, email me at blaserdebate@gmail.com

Campbell Hight

She/her

Washburn Rural '26

hightcam@usd437.net

If you are reading this, you are probably a novice, and I am probably judging you!

First of all, good job reading the paradigm.

General Things

Speed is fine

Tech over truth

Condo is almost always good

Fairness is an impact

I default to judge kick

Judge instruction is important

Cross-X doesn't matter unless you bring it up in a speech

Be kind and respectful and we'll all have a good time

I won't evaluate anything that happened outside of the round

Flow!

Preferences

Topicality -I'm a big fan of T as an argument, and I think it's really important to learn how to read. That being said, I'm not a big fan of just spreading through blocks and not making any analytical arguments off the flow. I will vote on T in the novice packet, but I set the bar at being able to explain your argument without reading blocks.

Ks - I have minimal experience with Ks. Read what you want, but know I know nothing.

Counter-Plans -I love counter plans (when they actually have a net benefit)! Just make sure to explain what your counterplan actually does, and why it's different then the plan.

Everything else is probably fine

hey, my name is ian mead. i have debated for three years at "The H" (hayden high). i have debated novice, JV, open.

i'm cool with speed. if your gonna go real fast, please slide me the documents either through speech drop or my email: meadian@haydencatholic.net

you don't have to call me judge, just call me "ian"

General:

arguments are not won or lost in cards, they are won by analytics and explanations. With that being said, analytics and explanations are significantly better if you have cards to back them up.

Neg Arguments:

HAVE THE WHOLE ARGUMENT. don't have a DA with just uniqueness or T with just a violation. you need all the parts if not, your just wasting time because I'm not gonna vote on half finished off case positions

T: i do not hesitate to vote on well run topicality. neg has to have specific violation and voters. if there is no we-meet or counterinterp provided by the aff, the debate is over after the 2AC.

CP: cool with CP's. CP solvency is big for me. gotta have a good net benefit. on weird perms, just stop.

DA: big fan of DA's, definitely a voter for me. link's are important; link chains should not be so far stretched that there isn't a clear way we get from point a to point b. generic Da's are great as long as you have a clear link chain. if you don't have a fully fleshed out DA, you not get my vote on the DA.

K: i personal do not have a lot of experience on K's. i have hit a few but have never run one. if you decide to read one, explain it more in depth.

I have opinions about all of these but run whatever you please.

Personal Preferences:

this is something personal but it's not something that will make me vote you down. don't debate so uptight, I get you want to look more distinguished, but there is a difference between being professional and being a puppet. at the end of the day, this activity is supposed to be education AND enjoyable.

i'm cool with open cross x as long as both teams mutually agree.

if you have any questions for me before or after the round, feel free to talk to me or shoot an email.

Hello, my name is Kaven and I have done High School Debate and Forensics for three years. I have been a judge for two years and have judged many different novice online tournaments.

Please either add me to the email chain or speech drop: oloughlinkaven@haydencatholic.net

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Main things:

-Please do not lie and say you said something that you didn't say, stick to what you said don't change it because you messed up. This will result in an automatic loss.

-Be respectful in the round, there is no point in being a jerk because the other team messed something up.

-I do consider cx in my decision if you trip someone up and then show that.

-I am perfectly ok with speed but if you are speaking fast then slide the doc so I can follow it easier

-Make sure that you have complete off-case positions, don't run a T with only a violation and no voters or a DA with no clear link chain, I will not vote on half-finished arguments

-Please please use all of your Cross Ex times so that your partner can get some extra prep time, I don't care if you just sit there and sing broadway show tunes just say something to keep the time going.

-Same with speeches don't ever just not give a speech go up there and say random stuff.

Topicality:

-I will vote on Topicality, I do like seeing it in a round but make sure that it is valid and real not just a time waster. I do not like watching things run just to waste the affirmative team's time, there is no point to this, and is just lazy.

-Do it if you think that the aff is not topical and that you can convince me. I think that each team should have competing interpretations and both teams argue limits, ground, fairness, etc. Don't run T if the aff is obviously topical, please.

CounterPlans:

-I do like Counterplans but if you are going to run one please make sure that you show that it is better than the affirmative plan. Make sure that you have solvency for it, as well as either an internal or net benefit so you can have some impact calculus as to why it solves better stuff than the affirmative.

K's:

-I don't prefer Kritiks, but if you choose to run one I will listen, pay attention and follow it.

On Case:

-I vote heavily on case arguments. If you are on the Affirmative side make sure to show me that your plan will solve and is worth voting on. If you are on the Negative show me how the Aff's plan won't solve and just won't work.

-Please please use judge direction throughout the round. In your rebuttals, you should be telling me what I should be voting for in the debate and why your side has won. Even if you know you lost keep trying don't just give up. Confidence goes a long way.

-This is your debate, make it all yours. Run what you want this paradigm is just what I like/prefer, you don't have to use this as a guide.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't call me judge just call me Kaven

If you have any questions ask me before the round starts or feel free to send me an email

Washburn Rural '25

My pronouns are they/them. I’d prefer if you referred to me as Jace but in the end it doesn’t much matter.

General thoughts:

Respect:

Debate is fun, and is supposed to be fun for everyone. If you engage in tactics meant to detract from the experience of debate (ie. making meme arguments, being rude or disrespectful) your speaks will generally reflect that. I have 0 tolerance for the use of slurs of any variety, or any bigotedness towards anyone. That will result in a loss, no questions asked.

Speed and Clarity:

I generally pride myself in being able to keep up with decently fast speech, but if you aren’t clear I won’t be able to hear you. If you want to be safe, slow down on the flow and on heavy theory debates. Just an FYI, I do have a hearing disorder that makes it harder to hear quiet speech and certain consonants, but as long as you are clear and have good pronunciation, we should be peachy. I will clear you if I truly can’t flow, but I will still try to write down what I can hear.

Questions and Accessibility:

Don't hesitate to ask me any questions before or after the round. I'm here to help and clarify any doubts you might have. Even after the tournament, feel free to reach out via email, and I'll do my best to provide assistance and guidance.

Counterplans:

These are really fun. Whether it’s a cheat-y process counterplan or a normal PIC, counterplans and competition are fun debates to have and watch. There are some theory debates I agree with more, such as 50 state fiat bad (especially on a non-controversial topic, come on guys), word PICs bad, delay CPs bad, etc. Some theory arguments probably aren’t true like no neg fiat, condo bad, offsets bad, etc. It is always, however, up for debate, so go at it.

Disadvantages:

Disads are perf! I am a 1n, so I always enjoy a good disad and clean execution in the 1nr. Try to read impacts that are external, and less internal links is generally better, but at the end of the day if you can explain it I’m game.

Kritiks:

Kritiks are a grey area for me. As a 2a, I have trauma related to kritiks, but they also are core neg ground and provide some fun debates. I lean towards fairness as an internal link, but only because people don’t explain burnout as the impact. Clash is the better aff impact. Education is true but might not outweigh. Debate shapes subjectivity but probably not on a round by round basis. I’m only experienced with lit surrounding SetCol, Disability, and Cap, so anything else needs explanation of the theories powering it. Don’t just say “libidinal economy means they harm black folk” or “ontology means no perm” or “the drive to repopulate turns the aff”. Explain to me why these things mean what you say they mean, and I’m leagues more likely to vote for you.

FW:

See above for impact thoughts. Neg frameworks usually don't actually mean the aff doesn't get their aff, philosophical competition is bad and makes 0 sense, reps are important but the impacts of the aff shape and can justify reps, and the negative should probably get any link they want as long as they at least make sense. State bad, economics bad, specific words bad, etc all are valid links. That's just my feelings tho, I'll vote in both directions.

Topicality:

Topicality hurts my brain but is fun. If you go for a WM that isn’t obvious, definitions of extra words can help. IE “increase is distributed disjunctively” or “and means or”, etc.

Theory:

For other theory arguments, you need an interpretation, offense, and defense. If you have that, I'll vote on it, or strike arguments based on it. 50 state fiat is probably not a reason to reject the team. Condo is. PICs probably aren't. 2nc counterplans probably are. But it's all up for debate anyway.

Case Debate:

In addition to your counterplans, disadvantages, and Ks, don't forget the importance of robust case debate. Well-developed arguments that directly engage with your opponent's case are highly valued in my judging approach.

Speaker Points:

I appreciate effective communication skills and a clear presentation of arguments. These factors may influence speaker points positively. On the flip side, rudeness, condescension, or overly aggressive behavior can have a negative impact on your speaker points.

Evidence Quality:

Emphasize the quality of evidence over quantity. Credible, well-reasoned sources and in-depth analysis will carry more weight in my evaluation of arguments.

Cross-Ex:

Cx is an essential part of the debate. Effective use of it to extract key information and challenge your opponent's case increases your odds of winning. Forcing concessions in cx is all too often over looked, and I feel as if more cx moments should be referenced in speeches.