Tracy,+Joe

I am a junior at the University of Central Florida pursuing a double major in history and political science. I have been a member of the UCF policy debate team for all three years I have attended this institution. I am open to all arguments, provided they are effectively explained and contain a reason/story to vote on. In a debate round, every assertion or idea should be subject to critical examination. I want to see in-depth clash and an intellectually rigorous approach to arguments taken by both teams within the round. I love to see passionate debaters deeply engaged with the topic and/or with each other’s arguments. I very much enjoy kritical debate despite having a predisposition in my rounds toward running policy on the Aff. Critically examining the assumptions that are made before the round begins can be the role of both the affirmative and the negative. I am open to the possibility that the resolution is inherently flawed, therefore a K-Aff is something I could vote on. I prefer topic-specific criticisms as opposed to generic K debate. If you run a K as the Neg team, have a link story and make sure you answer the perm. If you can have a clear link, refute the perm, and explain why the impacts of the K outweigh affirmative impacts you will probably win. I have personally run Cap Ks, Indigenous Ks, and Ableism Ks, among others. The K needs an alternative. The K team has to win the alt, which they do by proving the alt solves better than the case, or that the alt solves for something that outweighs case. On the perm, provide good perm solvency evidence. Explain why the perm and the plan are mutually exclusive. Explain the net benefits of the CP, and why it is mutually exclusive from the Aff. A PIC with internal net benefits, or an impact turning all advantages is a good strategy for the negative.  I value education over fairness in the debate space, however fairness is not unimportant and can win if the impact is clear and a weighing mechanism is provided. The debate over the nature of this activity is important and should be had. Fleshing out the impacts of framework is important to win on it. Argue how the Aff uniquely triggers the DA, and what the impact is. Do impact calculus to explain what it is about your DA that helps you win the round, and contextualize it in terms of probability, magnitude, and timeframe. I don’t have specific preferences as to which DAs you run, just win the uniqueness debate and perform impact calc. A great strategy for the Aff against a DA is a turn, in addition to arguing no-link and/or that an Aff advantage outweighs. Be respectful toward one another. The debate space should be inclusive to as many people as possible without sacrificing academic rigor or competition. I want you to be passionate and excited to debate. Spreading is perfectly fine if it is clear. Debate is not a speech activity, but it still involves communication and you are trying to get me to vote for you, so communicate as clearly and persuasively as you can!
 * Biography **
 * Overview **
 * K-Debate **
 * CP **
 * Framework and T **
 * DAs **
 * <span style="font-family: &#39;Times New Roman&#39;; font-size: 12pt;">Procedure **