Balybina,+Darya

I did LD on the Houston circuit all 4 years of high school at Clear Falls ('14), I went to UNT MGW'12 and qualled to TFA state. I coach as well. University of Houston'18

s/o to pranav for pointing out my poor word economy on the paradigm s/o to Sean De Stefano for giving me a bad shoutout in his paradigm :( s/o to Daniel Conrad for an awesome shoutout, totes pref him a 1 if you can. s/o to Angela Ho for being A. Ho. <3 no s/o to jessica until she gets better at extending.

__**For policy:**__ I don't judge policy enough. I think the LD paradigm should probably cover most things but if not feel free to ask. I don't judge policy enough but I'll try my best! Just weigh clearly and make clear voters. - I don't count flashing as prep - open CX is fine - Prompting is fine

=__**For LD:**__= I welcome unique arguments, as long as they're topical. I ran mostly plans and counterplans in high school, and default util when it comes to decision making, unless you tell me to evaluate otherwise. I'm totally fine with kritikal arguments, just slow down if you're going to read dense philosophy and explain the kritikal terms ("shadowboxing the system", etc). I didnt run too many kritikal things in HS, but I still think K rounds are pretty interesting. Let it be a fun round, just tell me how to evaluate it. People tend to do better when they run things that they're comfortable with, so have fun!

It's really important that you explain your arguments and tell a good "story". I can keep up well with jargon, but I would rather you explain the implications and the links without having to rely too much on the terminology. I have to understand the argument, or else I won't vote on it OR will vote on the wrong way.

I love good link stories. I try my best not to intefere (ie, if your link story/arg is weak, I'll let the debater point those out and make them voters. I wont make them voters myself unless I have to.)

Also make sure link chains in extinction impacts are really good. I'll evaluate a poor extinction chain, but I won't be happy. I'm better with link chains that lead to more reasonable impacts.

My prioritization of arguments goes like this: topicality, theory, ROB, substance. I won't vote on blippy arguments. I feel like things should have a warrant.

TL;DR: do whatever you want, but explain things

__**Speaker Points**__ -Rudeness and being unclear will deduct you points. Arguments that I like will add you points. A 30 won't be hard to get as long as you explain well. If you're nice to a newer debater, I'll reward you. Weighing and good voters will bump you up as well. -I almost always give over 28 points so don't worry about it too much. Generally it means I think you should break. Unless I really dont like something that you did in round. -If a round ends up being messy or a "bad" round, don't worry. I feel like sometimes that will happen outside of the debater's control. I only penalize bad debaters/bad choices/bad args, so just dont cause a bad round.

__**Speed**__ I'm about a 7-9 on speed. I'll yell clear but if it becomes obnoxious I'll give you low speaks or won't flow the argument at all. -if you're unclear I hope you lose every single round -loud spreading is better than quiet spreading -please give me a second to get used to your voice/speaking style, after that have fun. -slow down on stuff you want me to really catch.

__**Theory/Topicality**__ - I default reasonability unless you tell me otherwise. - I actually love a good theory round - Slow down when reading interp and violation. - Weigh your theory shell and make it clear that there's consistent abuse in the round. You have to convince me to drop the debater, its easier for me to buy drop the argument. **Impact it well.** - layer shells and weigh abuses when there's multiple shells in the round so i know which shell to prioritize - Please dont make me vote on blippy theory. - easier to win "drop the debater" with me - I'll buy an RVI unless theres an untouched spike that says no rvi's. but the spike has to be extended (goes to all args of this nature) - tbh I'll pretty much vote on any theory shell - ill vote on presumption but you have to extend it for me as a voter and why theres an absence of offense. - I'm okay with most theory/t practices in debate, just make sure you flesh it out really well and tell me how different shells interact with other args like ROB, burdens, other shells, spikes, etc etc. -im okay with paragraph theory
 * -** naturally, theory/topicality comes before ROB, then substance. Unless you tell me otherwise.

__**Plans/CP/DA's**__ - good link stories in extinction impacts - an uncompetitive cp will just be a second aff. - really idk what else to say about this - i prefer more reasonable impacts to large magnitude impacts but im okay with voting off extinction

__**Kritiks**__ - im slowly starting to get more kritikal, and im starting to like these positions a lot - I'm better with low level theory than high level - i can understand a cap k/fem k/ etc etc. When it comes to stuff like hiedegger, DnG, baudrillard, etc, please slow and explain. - I'm pretty comfy with nietzsche, friere, zizek, marx, foucalt etc. Im also pretty comfy with general framework authors like rawls, kant etc etc. (ill try to update this as i learn) - slow down and clarify if youre going to read dense philosophy. I won't vote on arguments that I dont understand - some K's i noticed tend to be super nuanced in the link. I think it would be a better strat to use specific ac texts/cards to support the link. - slow down on the link - skep is fine, just dont use it to answer a structural oppression case.

__**Things you should do**__ - Slow down on card names,tags & claims, speeding up on warrants is fine. - **Slow down on plan texts, ROB, alts, theory interps/violations, or anything you want me to hear etc.** - Give clear voting issues and weigh, or else I will need to intervene. I'll try to make a fair decision every single round, but I can't always do that if you don't do the work for me. If I have to intervene expect low speaks. -be consistent and clean on the flow. //-make impacts explicitly clear. I need to know exactly how you want this to interact with the ballot and other arguments// -actually follow the paradigm -Extend correctly. -explain.

__**Things you shouldn't do**__ - Debate the decision after round. it will just make me more mad, and less likely to change my mind and like you in future rounds. Questions are fine. - Run morally repulsive things like "racism/homophobia/sexism good." I will actually drop you as a debater on face if you run that. If you need to clarify what I deem as unacceptable you can ask before round. - Make me vote of stuff I don't want to, or go for arguments that I don't like. - Be rude in round. - Tricky stuff. - If you're rude to your opponents during round (sarcasm, making fun of them, saying offensive stuff, overkilling on a novice, etc) I will tank your speaker points or may even drop you depending on the situation. - if you're unlcear or being messy on the flow don't get mad at me for not flowing. I shouldn't have to work that hard to type an argument. -Sketchy positions. -run things are that are bad for debate. -miscut evidence. I didnt run that much philosophy to be able to tell if a certain author actually concluded the claims youre running in round, with that being said, if you get called out in round I will call evidence. But please don't miscut evidence to begin with.

~some rounds I sign the ballot early, bc normally after the 2ar it wont take me long to put together who wins.However, I can still change my mind during the round. But after the round there's nothing you can do. ~I like to eat during rounds ~ignore my typing, I type comments during prep to help me sometimes. ~I update this a lot during tournaments. ~be nicer and louder during early rounds. I'm sleepy and I'm probably suffering.

Conflict: Clear Falls and Lamar Consolidated, anyone that I might be coaching

//Please let me know if you have any questions. You're totally welcome to find me after round for questions about the ballot, or ask about my paradigm before round.//

//If you have questions, my email is Dar.Balybina@gmail.com, or you can add me on facebook to ask questions.// //**Have fun, and good luck :)**//