Rounds,+Jax

Senior at Notre Dame High School 2016-2017 season

**General:** You do you as long as you can explain it. I love the activity and if you're in it I think you're doing something valuable with your time. Which, means that you should do your best to include everybody in the community and be a good person overall. If you start being a jerk during the debate, and it gets excessive, I will step in and I will drop your speaks. Be polite y'all, it isn't too difficult! Tech > Truth I love the warming debate. Co2 ag vs co2 bad is my favorite debate to judge. Do it well and I will give you great speaks. Puns. Jokes about Notre Dame. Correctly referencing the "ryan powell disad". References to the WWE or video games. All will make me laugh and may bump your speaks up a bit for it.

**Nontraditional affs:** I am sympathetic to framework generally speaking, but: At the least aff's should defend some form of the resolution, and have an advocacy statement (not necessarily the usfg). Affs that make broad statements about bad stuff happening without a mechanism or explanation for resolving the bad stuff are generally bland debates and leave the neg with no non-offensive ground. That being said don't be scared of reading your usual k aff, I will happily vote on it as long as you explain it to me. The most work you will need to do is explaining to me why my ballot actually means something. Non-usfg k affs don't usually get to perm the k unless they explain to me why they do.

**Case debate:** Love it. It's underused unfortunately, so if you do a great job at getting into the "nitty-gritty" details of what the aff actually does and how it does or does not solve, I will reward you with speaker points accordingly. Say no vs say yes debates are incredibly interesting to watch, you should be making those arguments. It is possible to win a zero risk of the aff and I will vote on presumption if the case debate is good enough.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">**Topicality/Theory:** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Meh....I'm not a fan of it, I just don't find theoretical debates very interesting. I do however, understand the value of them. This means that if you have the ability to win on substance, you should probably just go for substance. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Slow down for the love of all that is holy when reading your theory blocks, because like most people, my hand can only write so fast. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Condo is good in moderation - the neg should probably get 1 k and one 1 cp, anything more than that isn't great and condo bad becomes a viable strategy. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">The quality of process/consult/conditions cp's is determined by how good the ev is. If anything I lean more neg than aff on these due to being a 2n.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">**Framework:** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">I lean neg on this question. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Explain to me what abuse has occurred, and why it has become impossible or unfair to be neg. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">The argument should not be focused on the "content" of the 1ac, but rather that the way in which that their mechanism for doing so isn't T, and thats what makes it impossible to debate them. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Fairness is an impact. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Debate is probably a game. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">**Disads:** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Last year I hated the politics/elections disad. This year it has been one of my favorite arguments and I have gone for it extensively. Just be sure to have good link analysis and turns case stories. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">The Japan DA is great. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">**Counterplans:** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">These are great, I love them. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Offense/defense paradigm makes a lot of sense to me. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">I think the consult Japan cp is core neg ground this year. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Solvency advocates are important, if the aff sufficiently points out that the neg doesn't really have one, the cp goes away easily. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">**Kritiks:** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Kritiks I like are: Security, Agamben, Foucault, legalism, cap, consumption, and university. Which, isn't a very extensive or diverse list really. I have my niche of k's that I like, if you read one of those you can assume I have a bit of knowledge about it and can change how you argue about it accordingly. If its not on this list, I may have heard it, and if I have, my understanding of it will be on a very shallow level. So please be sure to give good explanations particularly in cx as to what the k actually means.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Links should be specific. You should explain why what the aff has done is uniquely bad and causes X impact to occur. I have a high threshold for the link debate.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">The alt should mean something. Its the weakest part of the debate which I know from experience, so invest time into telling me what it means to vote neg, what the world of the alternative looks like, and how it resolves the impact to the 1ac and the k.

<span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">**Good Luck and have fun!** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">(If you're stressing out: http://i.imgur.com/KZf5kWZ.gifv) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Note - this was probably a terrible paradigm and you might still have a question about the way I view debate. Please feel free to ask me or email me! Jaxr199@gmail.com (please include me on the email chain)