Olivarez,Quinn

I debated for one year on the national and TFA circuit and graduated in 2006. I now coach at Carnegie Vanguard HS in Houston; this is my second year coaching. i'm studying creative writing, art history, and philosophy at the University of Houston.

1. speed is fine

2. any argument you make, i am going to be okay with. This is true as long as you provide me with some sort of way to weigh each argument you're making in the round; subsequently, whoever is impacting more arguments back to whatever weighing mechanism is being used is probably who will win the round. the same goes for theory, a priori/prestandard/prima facie/ whatever you want to call it in round. if there's no tool i am given to evaluate an argument, i tend to not evaluate it whatsoever, because then there is no way to determine its importance or functionality in round. i find this to be an easy way to avoid intervening. furthermore, winning the weighing mechanism in the round isn't going to win you the round, because chances are there might be some turns going on in the round. seeing as how the weighing mechanism is used to WEIGH arguments, i would *really* appreciate it if in round you did this for me, once again, so i dont have to intervene. so yeah, weighing is important.

3. i like interesting, unique, off-the-wall arguments because i think it is important in debate to break the normal trend of arguments that are to be expected with each topic; HOWEVER, this doesn't mean that i'm going to vote for an argument just because it's unique, esoteric, interesting, or whatever. once again, the same goes for theory, other things like that. . . I am not going to vote off of arguments just because i particularly enjoy hearing them. for instance, you may be making the argument that only robots can administer justice, but if your opponent puts 7 turns on it, chances are you're not winning the round (or that portion of it).

4. making arguments like a-prioris or pre-standard issues about tautologies, usually aren't well-written or intersting to listen to. i won't dock your speaks for making them, however, and i won't not vote on them (straight up intervention) but i will dock the speaks of the debater who can't make the simplest responses to some of the least warranted arguments out there.

5. bad theory is just that. bad theory either a. is badly warranted, or b. is a total invitation for intervention. i know i didn't like judge intervention as a competitor, and chances are you don't want me to intervene either. i'll flow, listen to, and vote off of theory arguments, but if you are making dumb theory arguments that just happen to go unresponded to, then both debaters will get docked speaker points; one for making the bad argument, and the other for not even just saying 'this is a dumb argument.'

6. i try not to presume affirmative or negative, but if you make arguments as to why i should, that's cool too, i will vote off of them, or at least alter my in round decision calculus. once again, warrants and impacts coming out of arguments like this will get me to at least acknowledge them. in the event neither debater is extending any form of offense to win the round, i tend to presume affirmative because the resolution is a truth statement.

7. clearly label, and signpost arguments. that way, i know where to flow things, and if you don't, i will write them off to the side AT BEST. so yeah, signposting is especially important if you want me to weigh impacts or arguments against each other in round.

8. new in the 2 (nr/ar) are not cool. in fact, it's ridiculous and i will probably dock you a lot of speaker points for doing so.

9. speaker points, i'm fairly generous with. if you give the best 1ar ever, or a 2nr or something, you'll probably get a 30. if you are amusing you'll probably get a 29 or 30. if you a jerk, you'll get something bad. if you are a bad speaker, you'll probably get bad speaker points. clarity and articulation are always a plus. if you are amusing, give an awesome 1ar, and are clear as well as articulate, i'll give you a 30 and high-5 you or something, maybe even low-5.

see you on the circuit.