Doty,+Kendra


 * Years Coached Policy Debate: ** 1
 * Years Competed in Policy Debate: ** 5
 * Coach or compete on the National Circuit? ** Yes

The main thing I want to see in a debate is that the participants are enjoying themselves. Debate is something that should be fun, so do what you want.
 * How I decide Policy debates: ** I wish I could have one of those “Hello my name is Kendra” stickers that I could post here, but you already know my name because a) it should be on the postings and b) it should also be somewhere on this page. But on to the point at hand. I debated at Centennial High in Idaho for four years and am now debating at Idaho State (so I’m kind to the K).

-Communication—I come from a community in which the only voter is how you present yourself, which is pretty shitty. So I don’t find how you speak a voter. However, seeing as this an activity which revolves fully around rhetoric, please be clear and don’t use racial slurs. Also, if you’re going to speak in another language either make sure it’s one I know or explain to me why you’re doing it. -Ethics—This is big. Be nice; Soyez sympa. I understand that there needs to be a certain amount of assertion in both speeches and cross-ex but that doesn’t mean that you need to make personal attacks or be hostile. Also, let you’re partner/opponent ask/answer questions, don’t be domineering. -Impact calc—Good way to go for me, otherwise the last two speeches might as well be the constructives. Tell me why you win.
 * Macro-issues: **

-T/Framework—I think that these debates can be awesome. I lean more towards framework when I say that, but I also like a good T debate. Go for the line by line. I think that for these debates, the passing ships analogy is all too fitting for many of these debates and that just makes me sad. So a “they say/ we say” strategy is best in front of me. -Theory—Please don’t go for the cheap shot, unless it’s all you’ve got. Again look to the passing ships part of the T/Framework stuff. But if it works, it works. Also, if it’s a legitimate argument, go for it. -Counterplan—Please let me know why it’s net beneficial for me to vote for the counterplan. That’s about it. -DA—that’s pretty self-explanatory. Do your thing, but make sure you have a decent internal link scenario. And if you read railroads, you gotta make the sound. #DrewCarlson. -K—As I said before, I’m friends with this argument. I genuinely believe that we should probably evaluate the ontological assumptions behind the decisions we make but you need to articulate that, or tell me that’s not the way to go. Articulate the link as well as the impact, especially if it’s abstract in comparison to the impacts of the 1AC. Otherwise I wont know what matters. The alt is pretty important as well, I’d like to know how me voting will change the world. -Performance—Love it. Tell me why it matters. There may be some bias in the arguments that I prefer, but that does NOT mean that you shouldn’t change you’re strategy to please me. I will vote on whatever you tell me to vote on. I’m not locked in to certain things and debate is a place where you should convince me to vote on something. If you have any questions, let me know.
 * Micro-issues: **