Carver,+Joe

Joseph Carver Director of Debate Carrollton School of the Sacred Heart

With a new year and a new topic, it appears that I will be judging much more than I have in the past two years. As a result, I felt like it was important to update my judging philosophy. There are a few changes – mostly one cosmetic- but one that is significant so I will begin with it;

In Round Behavior I have witnessed hostile, misogynistic and disrespectful behavior elevate to a level in our activity in the past two years that I think should be unacceptable. As a result, this sort of behavior will be penalized by those employed by the Carrollton Sacred Heart debate program. The intention is to operate as Tim Mahoney does with his clarity requests. If you behave rudely, there will be a warning. After that, each offense will be met with a call of “half” meaning the offender will be docked half a point. If you are unsure what constitutes an offense a) that is what the warming is for and b) you should know by now. Perhaps you figure striking the old man is the solution. I thought that too. Everyone associated with our program will be required to enforce the standard when they judge. Carrollton employees – temporary or not- will not be inactive witnesses to uncivilized behavior in debates. Now the strike conundrum is a bit more of a stretch as we tend to bring 4-5 people to each pool. Your choice. Treat one another as colleagues and friends and you have nothing to worry about. Choose to behave like a jackass and your points can go as low as 24.

Topicality My default mechanism is to evaluate nearly all theory questions through the lens of competing interpretations. This year I think that topicality may be a more viable option in front of than in years past- partially because I will be judging many more rounds and in part because I am becoming more and more convinced that some of the best critical thinking on a topic happens on this sheet of paper.

The K I love it. I just don’t think that your cobbled together alternative is competitive.And I think 90% of the time the literature you are drawing from comes from the bottom of the academic barrel. If it is a crush, go for it, otherwise I would think twice.

Counterplan Theory et al I think that most arguments as to why the states counterplan is illegitimate are answered back by the standard of having a solvency advocate. If it is in the literature, it is predictable. And if it is predictable, it is legitimate. I went through this decision make phase the first time around when Korcok published it. I don’t think it works. Too limiting for the negative. My default is conditionality is good. I can be convinced otherwise. But a dense theory debate is not my kind of parade either Clowney. Get what you need out of this part of the debate and move on.

Disadvantages Is there ever zero percent risk to a DA? Sure there is. Just not very often. Once in my judging experience. In reality I probably tend to inflate the probability when left to my own devices so you should fight that. I hate that so much of the education of the politics debate will be so counterproductive without any acknowledgment that there may not even exist IN WRITING the “bill” that ALL this capital is being poured into. A smart politics debater is like a gift from on high. They are my favorite debates- the victor is usually the kid that worked harder and – like that moment in Rudy when the janitor clapped – all things are right with the world when that happens.

Card Reading I do it. Not a ton. But enough to reconstruct if I happened to lose focus or miss a part of the card. I do not like to be handed every card. I want the one I asked for and even if you think you have better insight into what I REALLY want, resist the urge. Just please give me what I ask for.

Clarity I still hear pretty well despite years of unprotected speaker side concert attendance. If I call clearer or louder don’t sweat losing points. I won’t dock you for that. Just being rude.

If you have questions, I hope you will ask them. I am easy to find. Have a great year.