Dummitt,+Jared

I debated for Stuyvesant High School for four years, and graduated in 2009. I debated nationally and locally, and went to NFL nationals, CFL nationals, and TOC’s.

Performance— I can flow more or less any degree of speed, as long as you articulate the names of carded authors and number multiple citations of the same author. Going fast because it’s strategically valuable is fine, but trying to bulldoze your opponent with a ton of low-quality arguments will not be reflected well in speaker points. On that note, I view speaker points as reflective of both content and oratorical ability. Argumentation— I don’t really have any preference. I’m always happy to hear an interesting philosophical perspective; of course, when such a position is articulated poorly or too quickly, I will not be inclined to vote on it. Stock positions are fine, as are critical ones, as long as the way in which the position functions is made clear. Creative or nuanced approaches to the topic are always good. Refutation that relies on spewing the terms “no warrant” or “no impact” is obviously not. Theory— I think of theory as a way to check abuse, not a strategic way to win a round. What this means is that running a bunch of theory in a case of dubious abuse will not be effective. Since theoretical argumentation appeals to my subjective understanding of what is fair and what is not, I reserve the right to apply that subjectivity in determining whether or not you are stretching the degree of abuse that exists. Theory does not need to be presented in a shell as long as it is clearly and logically articulated; however, to this end, the shell is often the most effective means. Adjudication— I will vote based upon whatever calculus you present, as long as it is clearly articulated, whether it involves values, burdens, theory, etc. I place a great deal of emphasis on weighing. I feel that, in almost every round, each side will probably be able to pull some offense across, and it’s up to the debaters to tell me what pieces of offense are the most important. Debaters who can take a step back and explain the way in which the arguments on both sides interact and function in the round will probably get my ballot.

That pretty much sums it up. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask me before the round.