Andrews,+Mac


 * MacLean Andrews—Gonzaga Prep **

I debated policy in high school and NPDA/NPTE parli at Point Loma. I then coached NPDA/NPTE at PLNU. I am now the Director of Forensics at Gonzaga Prep in Spokane, WA. I mostly coach and judge high school CX and LD now. I see debate as an academic game and that’s how I will judge the round. Please feel free to ask me any questions before the round or email me if you have questions while filling out pref sheets (first initial last name at gprep.com)

1.Speaker points 2.Critical Arguments 3.Topicality. 4.Counterplans 5.Theory 6.Weighing Arguments 7.Random Thoughts
 * 1) 28-29 usually.
 * 1) I think there are critical implications to every speech act. Affirmative cases, topicalities, procedurals, kritiks, and performances can all be critically analyzed if the teams take the debate there. I am more than willing to listen to any type/kind of arguments but nothing will make me cringe more than a bad K debate. In the end it is up to the debaters in the round to tell me what framework I am to use to evaluate the round.
 * 1) I tend to see T through a competing interpretations framework unless told so otherwise. I have a fairly high threshold for T but that doesn’t mean I won’t vote for it. If it is the best strategy you have go for it.
 * 1) I will assume the CP is unconditional unless I’m told it’s not in the 1NC. I am personally predisposed to think Condo bad in parli debate but I am more than willing to listen to Condo good. In policy I am ok with a conditional advocacy.
 * 1) I am willing to listen to all theory arguments as long as a team can give me a reason to vote on the position. Theory positions should have a framework/interp, arguments for your position, and voters/impacts. Simply stating fairness or education as voting issues usually isn’t enough to win. Impact out why fairness or education or (insert voter) is important.
 * 1) I will default to Net Bens…but if you want to use an alternative weighing mechanism please explain and provide justification for it.
 * 2) I appreciate it when weighing is done in the speeches. The last thing you want is for me to have to weigh your arguments for you.
 * 1) <span style="color: #000000; font-family: &#39;Times New Roman&#39;;">Speed is great if clear.
 * 2) <span style="color: #000000; font-family: &#39;Times New Roman&#39;;">The round is for the debaters, do what you have to do to win. I will try to adapt to you instead of you adapting to me.
 * 3) <span style="color: #000000; font-family: &#39;Times New Roman&#39;;">Debate should be fun.