Mitchell,+Parker

**Parker Mitchell** Updated for: Spring 2018. Judgephilosophies wiki has previous versions with more thoughts if you are curious. **Quick version, FAQs and Pet Peeves** I'm Parker, u can call me that, or judge, or whatever. He/They/She are all fine. Plz don't shake my hand. On the big question of framework, i vote either way constantly. Competing interps are best There is NOT "always a risk" Fairness can be, but isn't always, an impact I flow cx Speed is good Postround me if you want In general, all arguments are winnable, just weigh your impacts. EXCEPTIONS: Racism, sexism, transphobia, explicit suicide advocacy (there are more nuanced ways to read death good), homophobia, ableism. Do not advocate for these things as good. I am generally in the camp that all arguments are debatable on the technical level, but these exceptions are critical to avoid explicit in-activity violence that prevents people from competing. This is apriori. I have only had to utilize this exception once. **OVERVIEW** My ballot decides whether or not the proposition of the affirmative (plan, advocacy, performance are all forms of propositions) is better than the proposition of the negative (whether that be the status quo or an alternative/counterplan). Exceptions: a question of whether or not the presentation of the aff or neg ought to be rejected apriori (theory [t, condo, etc.] or critique-based [misgendering, etc.]), unless I have been presented with a persuasive reason to not consider one side's proposition, I will default to weighing one position against the other. In the case the debate must be resolved apriori to the "substance" of the debate I will still end up weighing one "world" (e.g. the interp) against another (the counterinterp). Tech/Truth: Don’t change your arguments for me. I do believe debate (at the fundamental level) is a game, and therefore I'm open to any kind of strategy that will help you win that game. I will end the debate in favor of one proposition resolved only by the arguments in the round. I will use the technical aspects of the round to reach this decision. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">ETC: That is my fundamental philosophy which I will not deviate from. For my biases on your favorite arguments see below, as well as some useful info on my preferences on your delivery and administrative practices. An appendix is included of my past voting record so you can consider the effectiveness of your strategy in front of me in the past. This is a policy debate paradigm, my paradigms for other events are also listed in the appendix if I am judging you in one of those events. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">**EXPERIENCE** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">4 years of debate for Shawnee Mission East high school in Kansas, currently debating for the University of Missouri at Kansas City (junior), asst coach at Shawnee Mission East (3 years). <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">**SPECIFIC ARGS** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">T: T is my favorite argument and the one I have the most experience with. It is often the most strategic option regardless of affirmative. T is not (fundamentally) evil, and using it as a time suck is just good strategy. RVIs are bad, but T can be impact turned if done well by a K aff. The neg needs an interp and the aff should have a counterinterp. If you don’t meet any interp you probably lose. I will evaluate under competing interpretations almost always. Reasonability is silly. I have not judged enough T debates this year, so I might not be knowledgeable about the distinctions in literature, however, please do delve into those distinctions as this is a fascinating debate to me. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">CPs: Counterplans are cool. Functional competition is a good standard in my opinion. Textual competition can be debated, functional competition likely trumps it. You need a NB the CP avoids and links to perm do both. Cheating CPs are fine, win theoretical justifications+substance and you will win, I will likely not reject team unless dropped. I have, however, voted on theory against CPs before. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Statuses: In general, condo is good, dispo is silly, uncondo is ridiculous. If you’re going for condo bad, you’ll need an interpretation and reasons why your specific interp is good. Don't assume infinite condo is outrageous, I will attempt to evaluate theory with the same technical rigor as substance. That said, IF YOU'RE GONNA READ STATUS THEORY ASK WHAT THE STATUS IS. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">DAs: I've found I've sat (or had an argument) in a couple of close rounds with DA/Case strategies against the negative. I have difficulty assigning "minute risk" on disads if a no link is particularly persuasive and/or conceded. If I can't tell a story about why the aff is bad then it's difficult for me to vote negative. This is not to say that I won't vote on these strategies, in fact, I enjoy them, but you do have to have a clean 2nr that covers your bases particularly on the link level, or alternatively have a large amount of mitigation. Therefore, DAs are best with CPs or some kind of framing trick. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Ks: The neg can critique multiple portions of the affirmative. "Weighing the plan” is probably also good. Work out these nuances. Fiat illusory is not a trick, it's already assumed by the aff. Other K tricks can be important, so pay attention. I don't necessarily have any idea what you are talking about. You can’t get away just reading blocks at your computer, you will need to understand the argument you are making, and then convey that understanding to me. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">K Affs: They can be a valuable way of interacting with the resolution. K affs should at least engage the vast majority of the resolution. While K affs are great, framework is also a good, strategic argument. I find fairness claims generally more persuasive than education ones. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">**STYLE PREFERENCES** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Flowing: If it's on one sheet in the 1nc it will remain that way on my flow. Each individual sheet will be straight down, overviews not separate. Any "global overview" will be on the first sheet in the order. You can flow a separate sheet if you want but I won't. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Speed: Speed is generally good. Maintain clarity. I will clear you a few times and if you don’t get clearer, it’s your problem. I will continue to attempt to flow but there are no guarantees on how good my flow is anymore. I know I'm not flowing the full body of the card but I should be able to hear it. If the text is unclear you might as well have not read it. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">CX: CX is important. I flow cross-x. I will consider arguments made in cx as important arguments in the debate, and I will hold you to your cx answers. Open is better than closed, you should allow your partner to ask/answer questions during their "turn" or else their speaks will go down. In debates where one team is "Maverick", the Mav debater gets to decide whether they want open or closed, 2 on 1 cx is definitely unfair. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Language: I don’t mind swear words. Please, however, do not shift your language toward the other team. In particular the use of racial/sexist/homophobic/transphobic slurs in any way other than as a mechanism for argument (to be used only by individuals who are affected by those slurs) or in the course of describing that term to forward argument, will not be tolerated, and will result in 0 speaks and a loss. For gendered language (guys, incorrect use of pronouns), I will not automatically reject the team although I take this very seriously. I do think that mistakes happen very often, and I won’t be very punishing at first offense, as long as there is an apology. However, repeated offenses and disdain for this issue will likely be punished regardless of arguments. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Postrounding: you are welcome to. I enjoy a team that argues passionately for what they care for. Not license to be a jerk but I do appreciate well stated questions to my RFD. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">**ADMINISTRATION** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Clipping: Always cheating, and I have a zero tolerance policy. If you are making an accusation have proof and be willing to stake the round on it. I will immediately stop the round, review the evidence, and come to a conclusion. If the accused party did clip they will receive the Loss and 0 speaks, the accusing party will receive 0 speaks if the accused party did not clip. I will surrender to tournament regulations if need by on questions of the punishment. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Disclosure: I will orally disclose my decision after the round provided a couple things <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Prep: Flashing is not on prep time unless it's clear you're abusing it. Don't steal prep. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Speaks: Adjusted based on tournament pool: A novice 29.5 =! a TOC circuit 29.5. I will use CDR's points rubric which is based on statistical analysis. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">**APPENDICIES** <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Appendix 1: A list of things I've voted on <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2015 UMKC SDI Camp Tournament (MO/Summer) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Terror DA outweighs case [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, epistemology takeout and structural violence impact turn on PTX [2-1, majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2015 St. Mark's Sophomore Hoedown (TX/NatCir) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Security K, outweighs case, and a bunch of dropped K tricks [2-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Framework+Case outweighs the Fear of Death K [1-1] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Framework, can only evaluate the plantext, No Link to Cap [2-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Psychoanalysis Floating PIK [1-1] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, PIC out of "Domestic" [1-1] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2015 Shawnee Mission East Invitational (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Democracy Good [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, W/M on T-Court rulings not topical [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Domestic Extra T [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Intl Courts CP, Internal NB, Solves Case [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Advantage CPs+Elections DA [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, specific offense on the Alt for the Natives K, external impact of warming not solved by K [2-1, majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, No link to Prez Powers DA, probability framing, [2-1, minority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case (Warming) o/w Fem K, K can't solve case, perm [2-1, majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2015 KCKSNCFL Qualifier (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Elections DA outweighs Case (Heg) on T/F (I'm not sure how I voted on this) [2-1] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Intl courts CP, Internal NB, solves case [2-1, majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Surveillence, Topical Version of the Aff solves offense [2-1, majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Crime DA, case defense [2-1] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Politics DA outweighs and turns case, rollback [2-1, minority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, reject the team for blatant racism. **This is the only time I have ever stopped flowing a debate mid round.** [don't know other decisions] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2015 DKC City (MO/DKC UDL) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Wilderson K, alt solves case, no aff offense [5-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 Colleyville Heritage (TX/NatCir) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Wilderson K vs a policy aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Trans Poetry vs Colonialism K [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Framework vs Asian American Surveillence aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 ICW (IA/NatCir) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Trans Rage K vs Informants aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Chilling Effect vs Puar K [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, DnG K [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Feminist Killjoy Aff vs Zizek K [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Framework vs Agamben Aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Domestic Surveillence is only Bulk Data vs TSA Aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Its vs Courts aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 UMKC SDI Camp Tournament (MO/Summer) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Fem IR K vs Policy Aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case O/W DA (Appeasement) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T must be QPQ [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Japan CP solves the entire aff avoids Japan DA [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Japan DA turns and outweighs case [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 Shawnee Mission East Invitational (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, PTX (TPP turns and o/w case) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case (Space) outweighs Japan DA [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, w/m on T (T appeasement, the aff was "assertive negotiations on food safety") [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Korean war (dropped) outweighs Russia DA [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Cap K outweighs case under Epistemology first framework [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Xi DA outweighs and turns case [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Counter-interp (engagement=unconditional) better for limits vs T must be QPQ <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Xi DA outweighs and turns case, low risk of solvency of the affirmative (Hotlines) [2-1, Majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 KCKSNCFL Qualifier (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Presumption (no aff impact extended, no NB to perm on neolib) [2-1, Majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Presumption (Solvency advocate theory) [2-1, Majority OR 3-0, don't know 3rd decision] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Dip Cap DA outweighs case on timeframe [don't know other decisions] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, New affs bad theory [2-1, Majority OR 3-0, don't know 3rd decision] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Warming outweighs and low risk of Ryan DA [2-1, Majority OR 3-0, don't know 3rd decision] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 TTNSDA Qualifier (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, USAID CP doesn't solve the aff, also turns on CP (African Poaching aff) [2-1, Majority OR 3-0, don't know 3rd decision] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Appeasement DA outweighs and turns case, low risk of aff solvency [2-1, Majority OR 3-0, don't know 3rd decision] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Dip Cap DA outweighs (t/f) and turns case [2-1, Majority OR 3-0, don't know 3rd decision] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 Raytown South Invitational (MO) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Presumption, India CP/Appeasement-Containment DA vs Radio Free Asia aff (it was complicated) [4-1, Majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2016 KSHSAA 4-Speaker Regional Tournament-BVN Region (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-With vs CEDAW affirmative [don't know other decisions] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Delay CP cheating, Case outweighs and turns DA (transition) [don't know other decisions] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Engagement not culture vs Culinary Diplomacy aff [dont' know other decisions] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, We Meet on T non-mil <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 KSHSAA 6A State 2 Speaker (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case (heg) outweighs and turns disad (Appeasement) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Perm solves Consult Russia CP, shields link to DA (Russia) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Case turns on Sell China our Farms aff, poverty impact [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Condo bad (dropped) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Exceptionalism K turns and outweighs case [2-1, Majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, We meet on solvency advocate theory [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 KSHSAA 5A State 2 Speaker (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case (Warming) turns and outweighs disad (Xi Bad) [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 University Academy DKC Middle School Invitational (MO) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Cap K turns and outweighs case (Space) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Xi DA outweighs case (Space) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 DKC University Academy/Foreign Language Academy Middle School Scrimmage (MO) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Cap K plus china steals tech (Space) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 DKC City Champs Middle School (MO) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Taiwan Strikes DA outweighs case (Space) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case (Space, china war impact) turns and outweighs North Korea DA [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, ACA PTX outweighs case, case defense (Space) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case (Space) resolves nuclear war better than Xi DA (Xi Good, nationalism scenario) [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case defense did not rise to the level of presumption [4-1, minority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, K of China Threat rhetoric on a DA [5-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, No link to the North Korea DA [7-2, Minority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 National Debate Coaches Association (NDCA) National Championships (UT/NatCir) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Framework vs Bifo Aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Framework/case [Mutual Vulnerabilty Russia Impact] outweighs vs. Biopower K [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Probability framing, Xi Good DA non unique, delay bad kritik/solvency deficit thing vs CESCAP CP [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, impact framing/case (undocumented immigrants) outweighs/turns Framework + counterinterp Undocumented Immigrants don't have to be T [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 UMKC SDI Tournament (MO/Summer) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Education=Curriculum vs. Farm to Table [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, No link on Fism, STEM aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Neolib K vs farm to table, framework debate [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Neolib K vs STEM, root cause [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Trump Base PTX DA and States CP vs FLAP [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Neolib K vs FLAP, case turns [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, T-Education=curriculum vs. Desegregation [2-1, majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 Blue Valley West Kapfer Classic (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Solvency deficit to states CP conceded/no nb. Feminism history curriculum aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Waivers CP avoids military spending DA, solves the aff. Green schools aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Waivers CP avoids base politics da and DOE bad turn, extinction outweighs risk of solvency deficit. Native communities aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 Hutchinson Invitational (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, no NB to states CP, sex ed aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, solvency deficit and no link to Trumpism K, deseg aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Perm and solvency deficit on NFS CP/STEM NB and no link/no impact to ptx, Arts and Humanities aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 Iowa Caucus Tournament (IA/NatCir) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Abolitionism K vs CTE Aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, States CP solves the Ag Edu Aff, Midterms NB [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Counter-interp (Potlach) outweighs neg's Framework interp [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Deseg reifies racism/other case turns, neolib alt solves [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Agent CPs bad [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Contact theory outweighs links to neolib K [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, CP (increase funding for schools with disproportionate POC populations) doesn't solve contact theory/spill up of racism [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2017 KCKSNCFL National Qualifier (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, N/U, No internal link and no link on Fism, Bullying Affirmative [2-1 majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Topicality Regulation can't be Deregulation, Educational Commons Aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Housing segregation advantage CP solves the aff and avoids Midterms DA, right to education aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, States CP solves majority of the aff and avoids Midterms DA, Military Vouchers aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Perm on eliminate DOE CP avoids NBs (Constitutionality, Tax Reform, Fism) and solvency deficits outweigh, AVID aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Negative risk courts link to Devos PC DA, Right to Education Aff [2-1 majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">EKNSDA Qualifier (KS) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Federalism da outweighs case solvency, Right to Education Aff [2-1 majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, Midterms DA outweighs no impact to case, JROTC Aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, States CP solves the aff and avoids gerrymandering da, Right to Education Aff [3-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, States CP solves the aff and avoids Fism DA [4-1 majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">KSHSAA 6A State 2 Speaker <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Case outweighs and solvency deficits to Resource CP with integration bad NB, deseg aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Common core bad impact turn to Common Core DA, various defensive arguments on separate spec arguments. [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, States CP sufficiently solves the aff, midterms nb outweighs the case, sex ed aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, States CP doesn't solve, Case outweighs, no link to Fism da, sex ed aff [1-0] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Aff, Counterinterp key to aff ground, outweighs risk of limits explosion on T Curriculum, cybersec aff [2-1, Majority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">KSHSAA 5A State 2 Speaker <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Neg, DeVos DA turns case, deseg aff [2-1, minority] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Appendix 2: Tournaments Judged (15 total, 71 rounds) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">1. UMKC SDI (MO/Camp, 2015): 2 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">2. St. Mark's Sophomore Hoe Down (TX/NatCirc, 2015): 5 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">3. Shawnee Mission East Invitational (KS, 2015): 8 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">4. KCKSNCFL Qualifier (KS, 2015): 6 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">5. DKC City Championships (MO, 2015): 1 Round <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">6. Colleyville Heritage High School Invitationxal (TX/NatCirc, 2016): 3 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">7. Kanellis National Invitational/Iowa City West (IA/NatCirc, 2016): 7 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">8. UMKC SDI (MO/Camp, 2016): 5 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">9. Shawnee Mission East Invitational (KS, 2016): 8 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">10. KCKSNCFL Qualifier (KS, 2016): 5 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">11. TTNSDA Qualifier (KS, 2016): 3 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">12. Raytown South Invitational (MO, 2016): 1 Round <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">13. KSHSAA 4-Speaker Regional Tournament-BVN Region (KS, 2016): 4 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">14. KSHSAA 6A State 2 Speaker (KS, 2017): 6 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">15. KSHSAA 5A State 2 Speaker (KS, 2017): 1 Round <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">16. DKC University Academy Middle School Invitational (MO, 2017): 2 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">17. DKC University Academy/Foreign Language Academy Middle School Scrimmage (MO, 2017): 1 Round <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">18. DKC City Championships, Middle School (MO, 2017): 7 rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">19. NDCA National Championships (UT/NatCirc, 2017): 4 rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">20. UMKC SDI Tournament (MO/Summer, 2017): 7 Rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">21. Blue Valley West Kapfer Classic (KS, 2017): 3 rounds <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Appendix 3: Constraints a. Personal constraints <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">[none currently] <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">b. Team constraints <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">1) Shawnee Mission East <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">c. Tournament constraints <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">1) NSDA Nationals <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Appendix 4: LD Paradigm Probably won't end up judging much of this, except at occasional Spring tournaments in Kansas or in Missouri. I have limited LD experience, I debated it for a couple of years in KS and went to NSDA nationals. Speed, Ks, plans are fine, I may not fully understand the nuances of LD theory however, so more explanation may be needed. I will flow (on paper because I don't have an LD flowing template), please let's try to all flow the round in the same way, tell me how many sheets I should be flowing the AC/NC on, and where you're going. There seems to be no universally agreed upon way to flow an LD round so I will bend to the will of you all. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">In terms of how I evaluate the round, this will be determined by the debaters. I never really understood value/value-criterion as anything other than the framing of the round. I think at the end of the round I (unless a plan/cp has been read) will be deciding whether or not the resolution is good/true. What this means can be interpreted and explained out by the debaters, but in general I'm not deciding who's value is better or who's criterion is better. This means if the neg wins their value and criterion this is not an auto-win, if affirming the resolution fulfills this criterion better (as per the arguments on the flow), then the aff wins. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Appendix 5: PFD Paradigm I don't judge a lot of this, but since I started judging Missouri tournaments I have ended up in this event on occasion. This is probably the mainstream debate event in which I have the least experience, and I tend to enjoy judging the other events more. I will evaluate the debate on the flow, and I will attempt to flow (although this is difficult given the structure and style of PFD, my flows often get messy). Your case (pro or con) should include offensive reasons to vote for your side, not just defense. I think that, however, whichever team goes second (even before the first crossfire) should attempt to answer the points of the other team's case in their first speech. I believe that the second speech should also extend points from their previous speech, even and especially if dropped by opponents. I will consider these dropped (or kicked) arguments unless both sides drop all their cases in which case it is a wash and I'll go on evaluating the debate from there. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Crossfire is too often used as an excuse to talk at each other and not to each other. Even though you don't have to be directly posing questions during crossfire, it shouldn't just be stating arguments back at each other, respond and adapt your arguments throughout the crossfire. I would prefer if this was treated more like cross-x is in debate, but I understand why it isn't.
 * 1) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">the tournament allows it -- if they don’t (yay KS tournaments) I will at the very least disclose some comments I had about the round.
 * 2) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">y’all disclose too. I want both teams before the round to disclose a reasonable amount of time before we start. I want the negative to disclose past 2NRs and the aff to disclose the aff that will be read (unless they are breaking new). I have the potential to vote on disclosure theory.