Scolaro,+Kate

**Kate Scolaro**

Current Policy Debater at UF Former debater at North Broward Preparatory School (3 yrs LD, 1 yr policy)

**General Overview/Random Thoughts**

Put me on the email chain if there is one – kscolaro@ufl.edu Feel feel to email me questions after the round too!

I started out doing LD then switched to policy where I almost exclusively debate Ks. I’ll judge the debate how I’m told to. Debate however you want and enjoy it. It will make the community and everyone’s experience much, much better!

**Policy**


 * Aff- Do whatever you want to do. Seriously. I //want// to listen to anything you feel is important. That being said, you’re going to need to defend why what you’re doing is important to the round/debate community/world. Affs should probably defend something. What that “something” is can be decided during the round.
 * CPs and DAs – I like //smart/true// CPs and DAs. I also like //interesting/fun// CPs and DAs. I don’t usually run these but if it falls into either of these categories they you’re in a good spot. If you’re going to be running the conventional China/Russia/Politics DAs just remember it isn’t exactly my wheelhouse (though they may be common enough to everyone else) so don’t devolve into too much jargon/acronyms (think SOI/ICBM; things like that).
 * K’s/performance/identity – Do it up. I’m used to one off K debates but still appreciate the strategic value of a short K to throw in the 1NC. If this is what you like debating, then I’m generally a decent judge for you. Whether this manifests as some white post modern theory or comes from your individual social location, I’m down. While I’m usually good at understanding most K’s I still want you to explain it to me (and your opponent) in a productive way. Prove to me that I’m not just voting for you because you confused your opponent or repeated your tags over and over. Do your link, impact, and alt work early and sell it in the 2NR.
 * FW/T - I get it and I'll vote for it if you do the work. The important thing is to convince me. Tell me what debate looks like under your interpretation and why the aff's interps are bad. I generally like non-topical affs and manipulating the resolution to talk about K(ish) topics... so that makes it more of an uphill battle for fw teams. I'll probably have a gut judgement about how predictable the aff is when I hear the 1AC that may impact my thoughts on FW (i.e. I'm more likely to vote on fw if a team breaks a new completely untopical k aff as opposed to you reading one off fw against a camp k aff that has been read at every tournament.)
 * Theory - I'm going to need you to seriously slow down when rushing through your blocks. Most of the theory debate I see just devolve into teams reading their blocks at each other and repeating their standards over and over. Make the theory debate at least sound like it isn't some canned block you're banking on your opponent dropping so you can win the debate and I won't mind it. If you do only read blocks then shallowly extend that the entire debate and I have to construct arguments and clash for you at the end of the round I'm not going to be very happy. I like shifty things that people who run a lot of theory might consider "unfair" or "cheating." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 * PICs/PIKs/other shifty things - I like these arguments. As long as you handle the theory debate well, I really enjoy listening to debates that have some sort of semi-cheating advocacy. Be clever about it and I'll appreciate you.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">If you have specific questions feel free to ask me!!!


 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">LD **
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Here's my mini rant: I don't know how I feel about LD becoming a one person, shorter, shallower, version of policy. (how are you going to read a CP when there isn't a plan?! And if there is a plan...why?) This isn't to say that I won't vote for you if your aff has a plan or your neg strat is three off... I'm just not sure if that is what LD should be about. However, I don't do LD and I'm not part of the process of LD changing into something else so if that is how you want to debate more power to you.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">I like Ks so if you're going to use some policy type args, start with that one.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">I'm not going to be a great judge for you if you enjoy frivolous theory debates or have tons of theory spikes or preempts to different frameworks. I barely like fairness arguments in policy if I'm being honest. Engage with your opponent don't use theory as a way to avoid topic research.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Anything else is game. If you have specific questions please ask me!