Shackleford,+Melanie

2017 update: I haven't judged in over a year and I'm not familiar with the topic. Please speak at a reasonable speed and don't expect me to already know the topic lit absent a full explanation in the round.

Background - I debated for Meadows in Las Vegas, NV for 4 years and went to the TOC my senior year.

FAQ Are you OK with spreading? Yes. Slow down for tags and authors. Can I sit during my speeches? Yes Can I use flex prep? Yes, if your opponent is OK with it. (Flex prep means asking CX questions during prep time. It DOES NOT mean using CX as prep time!!!) How do I get high speaker points? I give speaks based on your strategy, and not as much on how well you speak. I like rewarding strategies that clearly have a lot of thought and research put into it more than blippy theory.

Theory
To quote a poem by Kevin Krotz:

"marbles are the perfect metaphor for theory how a beautiful shell is one thats like a marble or a pearl small, but flawless tough to break beautiful to look at a textured surface, but hard to break on the other hand most shells kids these days read are like bowling balls clunky and big, with needless holes, and if you push it too hard, it breaks cuz its hollow inside no meaning, no beauty"

-I'm fine with theory although I'm not a fan of super blippy or frivolous arguments. I won't vote off of an an unwarranted spike. -I'll vote on a spike as long as it has a warrant and an impact (voter) -Please explain the implication of your shell (drop the argument, drop the debater, whether theory precedes the K, etc) otherwise i will be very unsure about how to evaluate your shell. That being said, unless arguments are made otherwise, I will default to drop the debater -I'm OK with RVIs in general but my view changes based on the situation. For instance, if there's multiple shells then going for the RVI is strategic and I'll be more likely to vote on it. Don't bother going for an RVI if you can answer theory and still win on substance, or if you're actually being abusive. -Fairness is a voter but education/role of the ballot is probably more important so please do weighing

Topicality Go for it

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Kritiks <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Explain it well, please <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-The alt is usually the weakest part of the K. I'm not a fan of vague arguments (if your alt begins with "rethink," "examine," "evaluate" or anything similar then it's probably very susceptible to a permutation) so the more coherent your alt is, the better. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-I'll vote on micropolitical arguments <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Your role of the ballot needs to appeal to pedagogy/education in order for it to precede other arguments

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Framework <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">I’m not familiar with a lot of analytic philosophy. I'm not the best at evaluating framework debate so please explain arguments very well.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Other notes

-You should share your case with your opponent (via flashdrive, email, paper, etc) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Please don't be rude(You will get lower speaks and/or a loss depending on severity). Debate is supposed to be fun and educational so do not be mean/excessively competitive to the point where you make other competitors feel uncomfortable, excluded, or offended. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Please don't run/say anything offensive. Same thing from above applies. If you don't know if your argument is offensive you should either just not run it out of caution or check with me before the round.