Shen,+Lucy

Lucy Shen
Wake Forest '18 Bronx Science '14

Judged ~20-30 novice/JV rounds; Judged a couple of Novice outrounds

*Last updated July 24th, 2013 =Words of Wisdom=  
 * 'i find the argument that rocks are people unconvincing'
 * 'please do not go for the taoism k'
 * 'racism, sexism, death and homophobia good are false arguments'

====//*(Credits due to my life// //coach Vikram Kohli) // Please note that this part above isn't part of my 'official philosophy.' Refer to the comments below. **====
 * DAs -- gr00t
 * CPs -- 
 * Ks -- 
 * T -- 
 * Case -- <blah blah blah this isn't usually argued enough blah blah who am i kidding you're novices you would rather read another spec argument blah?

=Overview & //Brief Notes//=

//First things first--please have fun and be// confident!// Confidence is key--if you show up to your round with the mentality that you are going to lose, you are bound to underperform! Please be confident and please don't be hostile to your opponents! Please don't be overly rude to your opponent/partner. I am okay with being 'aggressive', but don't push it because that will reflect poorly upon your speaks.

I try to adhere to the 'tabula rasa' mentality when judging all rounds, but as you might have figured out already, that is quite impossible. I am looking for well warranted, thoroughly explained arguments throughout the entirety of the round! My threshold for extensions aren't incredibly high--all I am asking for is a claim and a warrant! Also, please note that one of my pet peeves is when your opponent claims that you've 'conceded' or 'dropped' something that you have actually covered quite thoroughly. I am also not persuaded by morally wrong/offensive arguments such as Racism good, genocide good, patriarchy good... Please don't run them!

~Please please please do line by line! Make my life easier! Makes my flow more organized, makes me happier as a judge and more eager to vote for you! =Topicality= Loooove T--this can be attributed by my partners affinity (I'm the 2A) for going for T/framework. Please note that an extension of your interpretation is //not// enough (I've seen this in too many novice rounds!) Although I do default to competing interpretations, please note that as a 2A, I am sympathetic towards the aff when the negative goes for some sort of framing/topicality type arguments. When going for T, I expect it to be all 5 minutes of your 2NR, with extensions of the interpretation and //standards (//something novices tend to forget). I love a good T debate!
 * Use CX wisely--I don't flow CX but I **definitely** take it into account!
 * Be loud & clear--I will say clear 3 times, if you don't speak clearly after the three times, I will deduct speaks.
 * Don't lie & misconstrue information!
 * **I will give each team 30 seconds of free time to flash your files over to the other team; if you use more than 30 seconds, I will start timing prep for flashing!**

=Disads= Love them! The more specific the better! Impact framing/calculus is a must--I think its extremely under-utilized, especially in novice debate. =CPs= They're great! The more specific the better! Some notes =Kritiks= Like I said before, please don't read generic K answers- like vague alts bad.
 * I like a good agenda disad/politics disad debate
 * Give me a clear link story!
 * I don't like conditions CPs--if you run it, please give me reasons as to why the CP is competitive
 * Process CPs are cool but I'm sympathetic towards the aff and CP theory
 * I think well prepped out advantage counterplans are great and strategic!
 * I am a fan of kritiks--just try not to drain me with radical left-ist K's because most likely, I will have a hard time understanding your arguments!
 * If you choose to go for the K, please please please explain the alt and provide me with a clear link story.

...to be finished ASAP