Durkin,+Tom

Background: I am the debate coach at Loyola Blakefield. I debated in high school and college. I am very familiar with the topic, and I travel as a judge with my team on the circuit.

I believe that debate is a game with rules determined by the debaters. Play the game however you would like and I will evaluate it as you tell me. I have seen debate change, and I believe that the way debate has changed is good. I see debate as both an educational activity as well as a competition, so have fun.

In terms of topicality or theory, I think that when they are well-debated, they are enjoyable debates to watch. Often I find that theory is blippy and pure block-reading, lacking any clash. I have voted on condo more than once this year because negative teams have mishandled it. I am willing to vote on theory, but make sure it is warranted and responsive.

Well-executed case debates can win rounds for either side as well as provide a place to earn speakerpoints.

Disads are great, there is not much else to say. Make sure to weigh impacts, because I am more inclined to vote for a team who does when the other team does not. Politics cards often lack warrants, but I like to reward good research and hard work. Neg teams should be careful with intrinsicness arguments.

Counterplans are great with a net benefit. I do not particularly enjoy generic counterplan debates, but given the breadth of the topic, it is understandable. Defend yourself against theory, and you will be fine.

Kritiks are great. I will listen to them and have voted on them. Throwing around endless postmodern jargon is only a sign of a debater's lack of understanding of the kritik. Please explain how the alternative functions and the role of the ballot thoroughly. Make specific links to the case. I think that certain alternatives abuse the concept of fiat, which makes me open-minded to framework debates as leverage for the aff. I do not think that kritiks should be altogether excluded from debate as an argument is very persuasive.

Performance debates are interesting. I will listen to these debates, and I often find them interesting and creative. As with kritiks, explain how the ballot functions and answer framework, and I will be willing to vote for you.

If there are any questions, I will be more than willing to explain further before the round begins. Debate can only be fun for me if it is fun for you. Do what you want, tell me how to vote, and I will.