Sydnor,+Jim

Affiliation: Mercer Island Mountain Brook 2007 Gonzaga 2011

Note: I did not attend any camps or have done much in depth topic research. Please refrain from excessive acronym usage. Explain your argument. I'm not an idiot, I'll figure it out, I just don't know the intricacies of the resolution yet.

Debate is not some static activity with set rules, but rather is a competition both of arguments and people's orientation towards the activity. At the end of the day, I would prefer you to run what you enjoy or are best at running. Most have me pegged as a K debater, and while that is my specialty, I qualified for the TOC going for policy based arguments and have read policy arguments in college. The point is, run whatever you want: whether it be a framework that excludes kritiks, wipe out, a criticism of debate, the politics disad, etc. It's your burden to tell me why I should care and how to evaluate the round. I default to offense/defense paradigm unless told otherwise.

Topicality: Default to competing interpretations unless told otherwise. I would like to hear a good comparison of the ground, education, whatever offered by both interpretations. Criticisms of topicality are acceptable: just please have a connection to the general thesis of your aff and articulate why it's an impact turn to the type of education and fairness promised by the negative. As said above, I don't know much about the topic yet, so you'll have to do more work explaining.

CP/DA: I don't really know what to put here. I prefer more specific CPs over your generics, but whatever wins, wins, right? I have no natural proclivity regarding theory: just tell me what to do and how to think.

Critiques: I believe that debate offers a unique site to continue the academic tradition of criticism. I will not lie; I am much more interested in hearing a K throwdown than automatons spewing health care pass now cards. This, however, doesn't mean that I won't vote against it; if you want to tell the dirty hippies to get out of your activity, be my guest so long as you articulate your point well. I am well acquainted with many, many different branches of "k lit." I've advanced the following arguments in the past: Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Marx, Heidegger, Sartre, Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari, Bataille, Queer Theory, Lacan, Zizek. I'm knowledgeable of arguments outside of these as well. For me, the most important thing for both teams is establishing a framework for how I evaluate the round -- do I look at the hypothetical consequences of the plan or the knowledge produced? Competing performance? Relationship to life? The easiest way to get my ballot is to tell me what your framework is and why if you win this one argument, you win everything else on the flow. The aff's best bet is to go for the permutation in front of me (although a good impact turn debate is always enjoyable) -- however, in order for the permutation to make any sense to me, you must still articulate a framework where your plan means something.

Again, just because this is the biggest part of my judging philosophy does NOT mean you should just read this because you think I'll buy it. There is nothing worse than a bad K debate. PLEASE do me a favor and read what you are good at.

"Alternative" Forms of Debate: Want to perform? Read a story? Tell a joke? Dance with chairs? Put on a puppet show? The round is yours to make of it. All I ask is that you impact it. Tell me why I need to think of debate in a certain way or why our activity needs to be reconceptualized. I just need to know what your politics (if you have one) are and why that is a good thing. The one thing I ask is that you let me sign my own ballot, so please do not attempt to pirate or steal what is mine. While the debate round is yours, I am still the judge and feel an obligation in the name of fairness (assuming that is something worthy to be upheld) and keeping/making our activity an educational clash of ideas rather than a foot race.

Miscellaneous: Good sense of humor is a fast way to get higher speaker points. Emphasis on good. I realize debate is a heated activity, but don't treat your opponent like (s)he pee'd in your cheerios. Hostility is unnecessary. This doesn't preclude sass. Just don't overdo it.

<3