Thompson,+Emma

Emma Thompson

Davis High School '11 Columbia University '15

I debated for Davis High School for four years, and competed fairly extensively on the national circuit. I now attend Columbia University and assist the Stuyvesant High School debate team. As such, I feel comfortable hearing pretty much any debate.

How I Judge: You have the freedom to run whatever you choose, but things like impact calculus and framing issues cannot be undercovered. I probably fall in the tech over truth side of that question, not in the sense that meta-framing does not matter (explained above), but in the sense that dropped arguments are true arguments all the time, even if it's something incredibly ridiculous like genocide good.

I'll list my argument preferences below, but as explained above, these defaults are probably more about how much I like you as a critic of argument and not so much as whether or not you will win the day:

Theory - I am pretty neg-biased on nearly all theory debates. I think conditionality is guaranteed, multiple conditional worlds are probably okay, and a counterplan can probably either be textually or functionally competitive, though preferably both. I am more likely to be persuaded that contradictory arguments are bad for debate rather than that one CP and one K is too much for the aff to handle. That being said, I like a good theory debate with in round analysis and I will vote on theory, especially if it is dropped.

Topicality - I think topicality is a good weapon in the neg arsenal. Play it smart and read good interpretations and counter-interpretations. A terrible topicality debate is probably the most boring, inane debate to judge.

Disads - Good, read them. Politics disads aren't the most educational but they are very important to a negative arsenal, and I don't have any preferences for or against them as an argument. As far as aff answers, I think defense is hardly ever used and a good defense is just as fine for me as lots of link turns/ impact turns.

Counterplans - Explained above, but basically, counterplans are important and multiple counterplans are fine. I don't have any hatred for process counterplans.

Kritiks - Win the framing issues. I think excluding critiques on the negative is pretty ridiculous but if your strat as an aff is a framework 2AC, then go for it I suppose. I tend to prefer frameworks which allow both the aff and the K to get their impacts.

Nontrad/Performance - No particular inclination for or against this style of debate.