Vaughan,+Joe

Scarsdale
I am the coach of Scarsdale High School in New York and honestly I generally tab a lot more than I judge.

Still, preffing me highly because you're gambling on me not coming out of the tab room is always a risky endeavor. Sometimes, even when you are tabbing, you are the best solution to a pref crisis.

I wrote this paradigm a LONG time ago. I

1. Advocate something. Both debaters have the opportunity and responsibility to present an advocacy during the round. At the end of the round, my preference is to vote FOR something as opposed to vote AGAINST something. Therefore, in my decision calculus offense is granted more weight than defense. This is crucial when you are negating in front of me. In fact, I believe that the negative has the comparative burden of clash. The aff sets the playing field and it is up to the neg to either accept that playing field or reconstruct it. If the neg chooses not accept the aff playing field, she had better explain clearly why her interpretation is preferable.

2. Theory is painful. I have little patience for theory debate unless there is an actual egregious violation of fairness. Running theory for the sake of theory is a good way to get low speaker points from me. That being said, I have in the past and will in the future, vote on theory arguments that are well explained and show how an opponent is actually doing something bad/wrong. Let’s debate the topic, not debate debate. Debates about debate tend to essentially come down to a coin flip and just beg for intervention.

3. Speed is an issue for me. I like to keep a complete flow but being dyslexic, I can only write so fast. I can’t give you a number on “how fast is too fast” but just look for my body language…I will look annoyed and flustered if you are going too fast and simply stop flowing. That is how you know I am no longer understanding you. I'm not going to shout 'clear' because I think it is your responsibility to actually look at me to gauge where I am. Despite what many debaters seem to think, it is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP UP WITH YOU; IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CONVINCE ME. If you are running critical literature you have an extra responsibility to go slower. Let’s be honest, this stuff is heady and interesting but it is impossible to actually understand at too great a clip. If you expect to win off of specific extentions, you had better make sure I get the arguments in the first place. If I don’t have them, I can do nothing for you.

4. Crystalize. I want a clear story of why I am voting FOR you at the end of the round. Write the ballot for me. To crystallize, it is important to discuss framework. Tell me how I ought to evaluate the round. Absent a clear decision calculus presented by the debaters, I am forced to intervene in which case no one is happy.

5. Off case is usually nonsense. If it were meaningful, it would be in your case, linked to a standard. Off case by definition doesn’t link to a standard, therefore carries little to no weight in the round. Feel free to tell me this so I may disregard these entirely.

6. I am fine with critical literature and positions. But once again, the denser the argument, the more it is your responsibility to explain it.

7. Be nice to each other. I have seen some really uncomfortable rounds. I’d like to never see them again. This doesn’t mean you can’t attack your opponent’s position, it just means you can’t attack your opponent by implying or stating something about their intelligence

8. Rhetoric is important. Tell me how your arguments function in the round (“This defensive response takes out his…,” “The extension of this warrant mitigates the impact of her 2nd voting issue…”).

9. Speaker points. I generally start at 27 (on a 30 scale) and work from there. You go up for having interesting positions, being tactically intelligent, being polite to your opponent, being aware of your volume (loudness = annoying), substantively engaging the other position and having arguments I can vote FOR rather than having to vote against your opponent. You go down for all the opposites.

Those things being said, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me before the round or any of my debaters. As a final note, please do not ask me my paradigm if you will then go on to blatantly ignore it. If you do, your speaks will be horrific. I mean truly horrific.