Swanson,+Ben

I’m from Lexington, Kentucky, where I debated three years in high school (Henry Clay) including two years on the circuit predominantly as a traditional debater. While I was primarily a debater, I also competed in extemp and impromptu in the state, and in the International Public Policy Forum. I’m now a student at Columbia.

Speed and speaking: I will drop or pick you up on the basis of your debating, not your speaking. That said, I believe that **debate is a communication exercise** and expect you to be articulate, clear, and comprehensible. I can deal with speed, but I don’t like it—a faster-than-conversational speed is absolutely fine, but please don’t spread. As a former extemper and impromptu-er (and debater who valued speech), I will be reserved with speaker points, which I dispense on the basis of how well you speak.

K’s, Plans, Counterplans, DAs, etc.: I'm happy to listen to these arguments, just be very clear on how they function and how they interact with your opponent’s arguments. Avoid jargon, particularly if your opponent is unfamiliar with it.

Theory: My background in theory is limited, but I’ll listen to (and potentially vote) on it //as long as it is very clear and well warranted.//

Conduct: Be polite to your fellow debater. I appreciate some decorum in rounds. I don’t care if you go paperless or not unless the tournament has something to say about that. Intellectual dishonesty will, at the very least, drop your speaks considerably; it may lose you the round.

I believe firmly that debate should be, but is not always, a safe space. It should go without saying, but to be clear, I will not tolerate racism, sexism, homophobia, class-based discrimination, or the like.

As for my conduct, I respect the time and effort that you have put into debate and believe that you can gain a lot from this activity. I will, therefore, respect you in rounds.

General Remarks: I like thorough, in-depth arguments that center on a few key points of clash. Bring in history, empirics, heavy duty philosophy, analytics, your own logic, or whatever else, as long as arguments are well warranted and impacted. **__There’s a special place in my heart for the excellent traditional debater.__** I really appreciate good use of cross-ex.

Update for Penn 2015: This is the first tournament I've judged on this res; I'm looking forward to it.