Matlin,+Ethan

Glenbrook North (2010-2014; qualified to the TOC twice) Pomona College ‘18


 * Debate is a technical, competitive game. You debate; I choose one team who did the better debating. I will vote on any argument that I have flowed and will evaluate the debate through whatever lens you tell me to in a manner which requires the least intervention.**

Although I debated almost exclusively policy at GBN, I've also become a bit bored with it (I'm looking at you politics disadvantage...). The point is, say whatever you want because...

Every argument is a bit silly. I will judge all arguments the same whether it's disad and case, aspec, or D and G; it’s your job to make arguments and my job to evaluate them. That being said, **interesting, non-generic arguments will likely increase your speaker points** (This includes traditionally "bad arguments" that most judges would never vote for; I love hearing these).


 * Evidence supports arguments; it doesn’t make them for you.** You also don’t need evidence to win an argument.
 * Thoughts on reading evidence:** In an ideal world, I would read no evidence (and trust me, you don't want me to read your evidence because there's only a chance that I will read it differently than you). Unfortunately, I have found this to be mostly not possible for three main reasons: 1. You speed through the text of cards without me having any idea of what you're saying. This is an enormous waste of speech time because I end up basically just understanding the tags of cards and whatever your explanation is later. Why not allow me to hear all the warrants in your undoubtably awesome evidence? 2. Lack of closure in final speeches. If an issue is left unresolved because you do not explain how I should decide a certain question, you put me in a very difficult position. 3. Lack of explanation. You need to be explaining the warrants and examples your evidence gives. Don't just say "there's been a ton of new spending projects that disprove the link" and repeat that over and over. Give me a list of all the spending programs.


 * CLEAR CLEAR CLEAR.** __I need to be able to understand the text of cards and you should use vocal inflection and emphasis to draw attention to important parts of evidence.__

My preference on arguments: **Disads—**I’ve yet to meet someone who didn’t like them. **Counterplans** are great, unless the negative shouldn’t get fiat. **Topicality** might be good or biopolitical. **Politics** is stupid in more ways than one, but if that’s your thing, go ahead because it always seems to work. **Kritiks**--I enjoy them when done well (be specific!) and am more comfortable in these debates than you may think; I actually spent a lot of leisure-time thinking about them in high school (even though we didn't go for them). **Theory?** No counterplans or 20 conditional consult counterplans is totally up to you.


 * Speaker points are obviously arbitrary.** They will be based on your respect for others, speaking style, argumentative talent, overall demeanor, demonstration of knowledge, evidence quality, creativity, argumentative choice, and various other arbitrary factors (in no particular order). While the way I vote is entirely dependent on what you say, I have a bit more control of speaker points. You’ll be rewarded if you go for an interesting or uncommon argument.


 * Cheating**: don’t.

I will always default to the least interventionist manner. That means, unless you tell me otherwise:
 * **No judge kick.**
 * **Presumption is towards less change.**
 * **Arguments consist of a claim.** Good arguments also have a warrant.

Finally, remember that **I am a human not a robot.** As much as I try to put everything out of my mind other than what I have written down on my flow, humans are non-objective by nature. Thus, it is important to remember that **debate is a communication activity** and that you are trying to persuade me (think about ethos, pathos, presentation skills, positive attitude, confidence, etc.) to vote for you, not to robotically determine that your arguments are "more correct."

__**I have not thought about debate for 2 years and know nothing about the China topic. Make of that what you will, but that probably means you should slow down, be extra clear, and explain things more than you usually would.**__