Shaner,+Houston

Written for the PF TOC:

I have a policy background from high school in college. This year ('09-'10) has been my first judging/coaching PF. On most topics, I view the resolution by default as a question of cost-benefit analysis; hence, impact analysis is important in my mind. I address a few points below.

The Final Focus: If I can stress one thing, it's that I would like impact comparison in the final focus (and, ideally, earlier in the debate). Many PF debates that I have judged over the course of this year end with each side claiming to have won every issue in the round. Such speeches often leave me with no choice but to decide on my own to which impacts I should give the most weight when I do not believe that one team has won all important issues. I would prefer that a team isolate one or two issues and give reasons why those issues outweigh any issues on which the opposing team may be ahead.

Cross-fire: Generally, I see cross-fire as less important than the speeches, and the cross-fire times are rarely a reason for me to vote for a team. I typically do not flow most of the cross-fire time but will occasionally make notes of key concessions or new evidence. I am not a big fan of teams reading/introducing new evidence during cross-fire. I would prefer that you present that evidence in a speech.

Non-utilitarian arguments: I have frequently heard appeals to values such as fairness or justice throughout the year. While I am willing to vote on such appeals against my default cost-benefit approach, I would greatly appreciate an articulation of what it means for society to be fair or just and why such values should trump other considerations. However, I realize that meta-ethical debates are difficult given the time constraints of PF, and I consequently will give a team some leeway.

Drops: While failing to answer an argument can be a major factor in my decision, not all dropped arguments hold the same significance (note the request for impact analysis above).

Add-ons: I am quite okay with and even encourage add-ons in the rebuttal.

Jargon: I am personally okay with the use of debate jargon, so feel free to throw it out there during speeches.

If you have any other questions about my preferences or views, please ask before the round.