Roberts,+Jeff+A

Jeff Roberts Judge Philosophy 2014-

I’ve predominantly found myself as a 'k coach’ or coaching at ‘k schools’ for the past decade or so. I tend to spend more of my time researching and reading critical literature and less of it keeping up with the current events in the news. I will probably not be as up on or familiar with all the policy research or your specific policy strat, but I’m certainly not opposed to voting for arguments of this sort with a little bit of help (explanation) if that’s the way the debaters wish to engage. If you want to know more about the my specific argument preferences or research interests it might help to take a look at some old caselists or talk to some of the teams I’ve worked with in the past - GMU (2013-2014) - UTSA (2010-2013) - UCO (2009-2010) - KSU (2008-2009) - Baylor (2004-2008). These folks can probably give you a more honest and appropriate interpretation of how I tend to evaluate a debate.

Recently I’ve noticed that several folks have decided to take it upon themselves to drop teams for ethical infractions of clipping absent any argument or challenge made by the debaters participating in the round. While I don’t have any specific stance on the whole clipping controversy - probably because I tend to think the traditional concept of reading, or what counts as, ‘cards’ is silly in the first place - I do see the value in trying to mold a safe, ethical, and positive, environment for students to engage in debate. I think ethics challenges beyond the one that I will explain below are on the onus of the debaters to initiate, and I will evaluate from there. I will not choose to self police what I view as "cheating".

On the other hand...

If you personally or the squad you debate at partakes in, employs, or associates with individuals having a history of sexually harassment infractions, rapists, or rape apologists - in any way, shape, or form - I will drop you on principle, regardless of the specific arguments made during the course of the debate. This means if your program employs such individuals in any official capacity (DoD/ADoD), hires said individuals in any nonofficial or semiofficial capacity to either judge at tournaments or cut cards for the squad (judges/assistant coaches/graduate assistants/volunteer coaches), or provides safe harbor these individuals at the expense of those they present harm, you will not be receiving my ballot.

If you have any specific questions about this, feel as if there may be a certain situation/individual that is questionable, I would probably err on the safe side and strike me.