Taylor,Edward


 * Hey there! I'm Edward Taylor and its a pleasure to meet you. **

I debated for Fort Lauderdale High School for all four years of high school. I primarily did PF, but I have also done LD.

__** Speed: **__ Speed should be fine, I wouldn’t try to go your absolute fastest, but I can handle a decent amount of speed. If I need you to be clear or slow down I will say “clear” or “slow” but I will never stop flowing; however, if I’m constantly saying “clear” I can only flow what I can actually hear. If you are going to run some deep philosophy or some really in depth K like D&G, then you need to decrease the speed by like 30-40%.

__** Theory: **__ There are times that theory is necessary, but that should not be your primary strat. No frivolous theory, meaning if it has no point in the round, don’t run it for shits and giggles. That being said, you can have theory and tricks in the AC but if you read something really blippy I might not be able to flow it, so make them clear and well warranted. Basically, don’t make really short or pointless arguments and expect me to understand them when you try to extend a specific one. I do listen to RVIs, and can vote either side on theory.

__** Kritiks: **__ K debate can be really cool. But it has to be clear, I personally didn’t engage is the K debate in my high school career so I’m not familiar with the common literature or phrases, but I do understand the basics of the K and how they function. Also as I said for speed, if you’re running something complex you have so slow down a bit.

__** Disadvantages and Counterplans: **__ Both positions are pretty cool, make sure you explain the counterplan and how it solves/ competes. If the aff is a specific plan you have to explain how the DA applies to it, or why a DA to the resolution is enough to negate.

__** Framework and voters: **__ Give me a good framework debate! I need to know how to weigh arguments in the round so the framework debate is extremely important. And, PLEASE GIVE ME VOTERS AND TELL ME WHAT TO WIEGH IN THE ROUND OR I WILL PICK THE MOST RANDOM THING TO VOTE OFF OF!!!!!!! If something needs to be weighed under different frameworks then you need to tell me why you outweigh.

__** Speaker Points and General Information: **__ I love sass and sarcasm if you can use it in an appropriate way please do, but obviously don't use it to make someone feel bad about their Gender/Sexuality/ Race/ Religion etc. I will assign speaker points on a scale that is relative to the skill level of the pool that I am judging in. Scale: 29.5 - 30: The gods of Olympus couldn’t of spoken better than you did. 29 - 29.5: I think should be in contention for a top five-speaker/ top ten speaker award. 28.5 - 29: Good solid debating - didn't make many technical mistakes, showed strategic vision, probably should advance to elimination rounds. 28.0 - 28.5: Average/good debating - you were good but made some big technical mistakes or showed mediocre strategic vision Below 26.5 - this is reserved for debaters who have done something to make me mad or personally offend me.

If you have any questions about my paradigm please don't be afraid to ask in round.