Baron,+Chris

Chris Baron 20 years in policy debate Towson University/BUDL baron@budl.org

Debate like your hair is on fire! Do what you do, with all the energy, intelligence, focus and persuasive ability you can. Debaters who make bold decisions from beginning to end will be rewarded. I will do my best to listen and give your arguments a fair hearing. Please do NOT take this to mean that: • you should be disrespectful toward your opponents • you should go at warp speed, sacrificing clarity and persuasive delivery • I will vote for the team that shouts the loudest One of the coolest things about debate is that debaters can direct the activity. I do have predispositions, but try to make my views about the world more flexible in a round of debate than they are outside of the round, to allow for more control by the debaters. So, leave as little to me as possible by developing clear ways to evaluate the debate and defending the implications of your arguments.

Be authentic. Disingenuous arguments undermine your credibility and are not so persuasive. I hear these arguments a lot on T and on theory debates (both sides). On things like abuse in debate or what you think debate is like and should be like, be as specific and realistic as you can.

How you make the argument does matter. In some debates, how much it matters and why is an issue, and I’m open to the range of arguments on this. But even in the “traditional” card-heavy, flow oriented rounds, cards read well sound better than cards read with no pauses or intonation, and that matters to me.

Most debaters read too many cards There are times when more cards are what is needed, but more often, its evidence analysis (of both yours and theirs), quality refutation, argument selection, and good explanations that do it. If I am needing to read a ton of cards to vote for you, something is probably wrong. Qualifications are not debated, or even presented, nearly enough, especially given how many quotations are deployed in the average debate round.

Communicate with the judge and the other debaters If one team is communicating directly to the judge and not the other team, that is a problem. I seriously encourage debaters to say “clearer” or “slower” if necessary. Abuse this at your peril. I have a high threshold for clarity. If you are unclear and I can’t catch the argument, I can’t promise to evaluate it. I also have a limited short term memory, and this is a constraint on my note taking skills. This can be an issue if you are reading lots of theory blocks or have complicated, four sentence tags to cards. It also means I will write as much down as I can so that I can consider it when making my decision.

Offer compelling reasons for decision. I can (and have) made many different types of decisions in rounds, depending on the arguments made. I can dismiss a counterplan because there just isn’t a link to a net benefit, when the 2NR is hoping for a risk of a risk of a link Conversely, I can vote on a Counterplan with a “direction arrow” net benefit—where the CP solves the case with a very small net benefit. Bottom line: if you leave decision making up to me, we may both be unhappy.

Good debaters get good points. Be funny. Engage your opponents. Be creative. Offer good explanations. Be reasonable. Practice good delivery. Take risks. Make my decision as easy as possible. Know your arguments. Know your opponent’s arguments. Be strategic. Do what you do well. Have fun!