Chiev,+Cindy

Updated: November 30, 2016
 * High School:** Jefferson High School in Bloomington, Minnesota '16
 * College:** Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas '20
 * I worked at the Minnesota Debate and Advocacy Workshop during the summer of 2016 and I judged at local San Antonio high school tournaments so I know the topic fairly well but don't expect me to be an expert about it.**


 * A little about me:**
 * I spent the first half of my high school career running "policy args" but the later half of high school I switched over to performance/identity args. I'm more comfortable with ID args but that doesn't mean I won't listen to traditional things.
 * That being said, **I really don't think judges should have a bias about what they're willing to listen to.** I spent a lot of time in high school dealing with judges who automatically knew they were going to vote me down because of the 1AC. I think that's extremely unproductive and harmful to this activity. Just do you and have fun!
 * I perfer analysis over just a bunch of card reading especially after the 2NC. I think it's a waste of time for you to keep reading new evidence when it pretty much says the same stuff as the last 5 cards you read. I want to know why I should care about the args in your own words. I think debate is an activity to enhance your critical thinking skills and you don't really do that if you just choose to read card after card.
 * **Clash is a must.** I want there to be a lot of interaction between your args and the other teams. Blocks are good, but you need to make them specific to different rounds. I don't want to hear generic blocks that you just copy and paste from your files.
 * I don't appreciate teams who are rude to the other team or their own partners. This includes: belittlement of each other, racist/sexist/transphobic/queerphobic language and behaviors, misgendering, nonverbals, and laughing during speeches. **Your speaks will suffer if you do this.** Honestly, just be nice to each other. We're all here to have a good time.
 * **2NR and 2AR**--> don't be too defensive! Have offense!
 * Add me to the email chains: cindy.chiev@gmail.com
 * Something that I didn't answer? Ask me before the round! I want us all to have fun so be respectful to each other and me and we'll be good. I look mean but I'm really a nice person!
 * **Bonus speaks for anyone who can guess what my favorite Lil Yachty song is**


 * CP:** Make sure you know how it's competitive with the aff.


 * DA:** Specific links on what the aff does that triggers your impacts- I'm not saying to just do generic links you have in your files but look inside the aff and pull lines from the 1AC. Those make stronger args. Evidence comparison is good!!


 * T/FW:** Make sure you emphasize why your interp is better for debate. Don't drop the other team's interp too! Fairness is my least favorite voter. T-version of the aff that solves the impacts of the aff's 1AC is needed for you to win FW. T/FW is def important args that shouldn't be brushed off.


 * K's:** I like K debates but don't assume I know everything about the K. Just like DA's, specific links from the 1AC will help you a lot. Don't just say "they use the state, that's a link". If you're going to run a K, make sure it's either with just the K or with case. Other offcases like a cp or da makes performative contradiction an arg that I will most likely vote on.


 * Theory:** Interesting arg but if you want to actually go for it you need to go ham on it in the 2NR. Like, all 5 minutes.


 * K Affs:** Love these! Make sure your aff actually does something though. I appreciate really thought out methodologies. Your aff also needs to have some sort of relationship to the topic.