Wingo,+Sarah

I value clarity over speed and have a tendency not to evaluate arguments that are not sign posted. The clearest speaker will receive the highest speaker points, and I will let you know if you’re not being clear. If I can’t understand you, I can’t flow your arguments, and they probably won’t factor highly in my decision.

I expect every debater to flow and to be nice to his or her opponents and partner. Cross-examinations should be civil and at a conversational volume.

I would consider myself more policy based, but I’m willing to hear any well-explained argument. I am more inclined to vote on nuclear war than value to life. I find myself lacking the conscience required to vote on “ethical obligation.”


 * Critical Arguments:** I think affirmative teams should have a plan text. I think a Kritik should be read at a slower speed and they should clearly link to the topic area. I am more inclined to vote for a team that clearly explains why only the alternative solves and how the plan doesn't. I believe that a K requires significantly more explanation, but, given this, I don’t have a problem voting for them. I am especially inclined to vote for an identified and impacted performative contradiction.


 * Topicality:** I don’t particularly enjoy T debates, but I will vote on them. I’d prefer a debate on limits and grounds rather than “abuse” and “fairness.” I’d like to hear a debate on the literature and competing interpretations.


 * Theory:** I can’t stand theory arguments. If you have answers to it, it’s probably fair. That being said, it will hear them and vote them up if explained and impacted. If you can explain why something such an issue, I will vote on it, but I am more likely to reject the argument not the team. You must tell me how I should evaluate the debate, meaning in which order I should evaluate theory and policy.


 * Prep:** I stop prep when you stop prepping. Simply tell me when you’re finished and save the document. During this time, no one except the flasher should be touching his or her computer. Flashing should be quick and the roadmap should be given simultaneously.


 * Other notes:**
 * 1) I don't care how good of a debater you are, if you aren’t nice, I won’t vote for you.
 * 2) On this same vein, if someone is being mean to you, no need to reciprocate. I will probably notice and make a face.
 * 3) CX is not a shouting match. It’s not a game of interruption. Aim to ask the question that the debater couldn't answer if he/she had the whole 3 minutes.
 * 4) Calm down. It’s just a game. If you aren’t having fun, you’re not debating correctly.
 * 5) I’m more inclined to vote for the team that’s having fun.
 * 6) I give long RFDs that pretty much spell out how, I think, both teams could have won. I spend a lot of time writing and giving these so I appreciate it when debaters take notes.