hobbs,+jodee

School andover central high school # of years debated in high school 3 what school 9 th - ramay jr. high, 10-11 fayetteville high school, AR

Number of years debated in college 4 what college/university harding university, AR

Currently a head hs coach

Number of rounds on this year’s hs topic 2 at tournaments, more at practice

What paradigm best describes your approach to debate policy/stock/narrative (in the fisher sense). I will try to be in the paradigm you put me, if you win the position. But, the above are my default

What do you think the aff burdens should be? To present a prima facie case

What do you think the neg burdens should be? To provide a reason to reject the aff’s prima facie case

How I feel about delivery (slow vs fast)? If it is clear, it can be relatively fast. If I cannot understand, I will say “clear”, after that, you are on your own.

How I feel about generic disads, counterplans, kritiks? Fine on all of the above – I do want some type of link or connection to the aff or resolution (if it is a kritikal aff). I do not like conditionality (see paradigm), but will vote for conditional arguments if the other side does not beat them. The easiest way to beat a kritik with me in the round is usually to show performative contradictions by the team running them. If you are going to run a kritik, you need to live the kritik. I prefer non-topical counterplans, but will vote for topical counterplans if the other side does not beat them.

How I feel about case debates? I enjoy them if they are true case debates – I can and have voted on solvency and inherency (sparingly, for inherency)

Other comments/suggestions: I am old, but not dead. I have been involved with debate since 1978. I have competed and coached at both the high school and college level. Ask questions before the round to find out what you need to find out about me. I do not like meanness in a round. I tend to flow claims rather than authors – so if you want to point something out – give me the claim rather than the author or I may miss it. I do listen to evidence and will flow what the card says as well as what the claim is. Make sure that there is a clear distinction between pieces of evidence. If there is a run on between the last sentence in the card and the next claim, I may miss it. That is easily solved by signposting with numbers and/or letters rather than “ANDDDD”.