MS Panther Pride
2025 — Salt Lake City, UT/US
Lincoln-Douglas Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideEmail: ddagar1039@gmail.com
Tech over truth
Debated for 3 years, 2 years on Utah middle school circuit LD, one year HS PF. I went 10th in PF and 2nd in impromptu at state. 2022-2024
I teach the middle schoolers at my school how to debate, so I know what a good round looks like.
I've judged for several middle school tournaments before, so I do know how to write a good ballot.
Debate:
I vote on fallacies. They are the number one thing I vote on. I want you to use fallacies in the rounds because that is what TRUE debate is and that is how to be a TRUE debater.
I competed in a few policy tournaments in middle school, so I know how policy rounds should go. I'm fine with spreading, just send me the doc on the email above, I can't decipher your spreading and write a good ballot at the same time. I would rather you be clear than fast. As a judge, I like clear link chains and impact debates, source debate is fine, but it most likely won't be the reason you win, so don't waste time on it. If you make me laugh, +1 speaker points. In cross-x, you can be aggressive, but don't be abusive, it ruins the debate. Weigh your impacts, they're one of the biggest things I vote on. Signpost and go down the flow, I will follow you but don't make it hard for me. If your arguments are abusive, I won't vote on them. If your only way of winning is through abusive arguments, you don't deserve to win.
LD specifically:
Extend your framework and impacts.
If you go overtime, I give a 15-second grace period, try not to go over it. I won't give you the loss for it, but I will decrease your speaker points.
Speaker points:
25> You were racist, homophobic, xenophobic, or just plain mean.
25.1 - 26.9: You weren't understandable and made the debate hard for me (and my flow) to follow.
27 - 27.9: You're doing well but need some work.
28 - 28.9: Top half and you are doing well
29 - 30: Good job!
West SLC '27
LD main
Background Info
Be from a BASIS school: -.2 speaks for bringing parents to circuit tournaments
Bring me boba: +.2 speaks
Don't be -ist or -phobic, L20
Prog Lder, run whatever you want if you can explain it
Spread to your own ability, I have the 'tism which worsens my already bad flowing, I can understand full spreading though 70-80% is easiest to flow
I can judge LD or CX, L if I'm your speech judge
For policy assume my topic knowledge is confined to generics
Add me to the email chain: streimsutton@gmail.com
I don't like:
Floating PIKs, there is a time in place for an extremely well run floating PIK, an extremely rare one. Unless you're ready for a miserable theory debate that you have the cards or analytics to win, don't.
Tricks, I'll never vote for them
Clipping, it's cheating
I don't intervene, don't assume I'll know what you're talking about or that I'll base my ballot on already known info
Screenshots, this isn't a debate of one's character, if you want to run disclosure theory and have evidence of out-of-round abuse, that is fine
Don't ask for marked docs unless they skipped a considerable quantity of cards
I like:
Impact calc, good clash on impact to determine which impact is actually the X risk, and or which has more magnitude, happens faster, etc
K debates, I will vote for any K. Explain it to me like I know nothing and what the impacts are. Any generic K I will understand without extensive explaining, Cap K, Racial IR, Setcol, Imperialism.
I prefer case-spec CPs rather than generic ones, I don't kick unless told to
For ROTB arguments, I am a good judge, I enjoy them and weigh them high
Affs should have advocacy/plans
TL:DR run whatever besides tricks
K/Larp(Policy) > T > Tricks
Misc:
Speaking your 2NC off the flow - +.2 speaks
Doing your 2AR in Ukrainian or Russian +.1 speaks
Send me your docs in a color that is not yellow
Don't over-adapt to my paradigm
Better paradigms to reference - Yao Yao Chen, Seiji Aoki, Ishan Sharma, Spencer Swickle