Aerni,+John

My Likes and Dislikes:

I am a parent of a debater and a lawyer by trade. I've never debated. I have little experience judging debate. My preferences: 1. Speak plain English. If I don't follow your argument, it won't help you. I don't have a paradigm. I have likes and dislikes; 2. Speed will not help your case with me. If I don't follow your argument,. . . I'm looking for arguments that are persuasive and warranted; 3. Do not use jargon. I would rather you say, "my opponent did not rebut my argument X, so it stands unopposed," rather than talking about "extensions"; 4. I have heard of something called "crystallization." I understand that it involves summarizing the reasons why you believe your argument should prevail over your opponent's. I favor your crystallizing the case at the end of your argument; 5. I have heard of something called "signposting," which I understand to be attempting to identify clearly the opponent's argument that you are about to address or rebut. I favor signposting; 6. I have heard of something called "running theory." I gather it involves claiming that your opponent's argument violates rules of fair play or has unfairly prejudiced your argument. I do not like that the phrase is a euphemism. If you want to make such an argument with me, the argument had better be clearly stated and warranted; 7. I have heard of something called "kritiks." I understand it to be an attack on the underlying premises of a resolution, as opposed to an attempt to affirm or negate the resolution as it was intended to be understood. I have not previously encountered such an argument while judging debate. If I feel that the argument is a gimmick to rattle an opponent, I will not like it. If the argument were to contain insight, on the other hand, I will not dismiss it out of hand; 8. I favor your numbering and labeling your points. It helps me follow your argument better. Clarity is a virtue. So are simplicity and elegance.