Yanik,+Mary

Mary Yanik High School Attended: Emporia High School College Attending: UMD-CP

I haven't judged any rounds on this topic, but I have done a little bit of research for my former squad. Still, explain acronyms/t violations. I promise I'll pick up on it quickly.

General: I guess I'd say I default policymaker if I'm not given a framework. I'm certainly inclined to consider alternative frameworks. I am most persuaded by very clear impact analysis, and clear articulation of the functionality of alternative if the neg presents one. I believe that everything is debatable, so don't let my personal preferences dissuade you from presenting a certain argument. Just win the argument. Tell me how I should evaluate the round and where I should vote. I believe debate is about the debaters and should not be dictated by judges. Trust that I will be a competent/intelligent judge.

Random Stuff: Speed is fine, but remember to give me a few seconds to get used to your voice before you speak as fast as possible (especially if you're reading T). I generally don't like new in the 2NC. I have a relatively high tolerance for theory, but this debate must be kept clean. T is cool, but once again you really don't want to put me in the position of evaluating a messy T flow. In general, I value a neat flow highly, and this is important to get high speaking points from me. Cross-x is important, and a good cross-x is another great way to secure good speaks. I may not flow it, but I will listen.

Ks: I enjoy critical debate done well. You must be able to explain your arg well - it will probably become apparent very quickly if you don't know the literature well. I think its very relevant to discuss the role of the ballot and discursive implications of the round. Explain the alt. Clash with the aff, etc. I think performative critical debate is legitimate, possibly the most legitimate form of critical debate. You can still argue otherwise. Authors I am more familiar with: Foucault, Agamben, Levinas, Lacan/Zizek/psychoanalysis, D&G, Any Feminism. Whether or not I'm particularly familiar with your author, explain everything clearly and you'll be fine.

DAs: Politics is cool. Crazy (nuke war and such, you know) impacts are fine, but you should probably have a fairly solid internal and link. I you are using stock cards which I am probably familiar with, please be aware and do not misinterpret the evidence. I won't intervene and vote you down for this, but I will cringe.

CPs: I'll certainly listen to any of them. I'm more fond of CPs that directly clash, but PICs are still okay. In most CP theory, I will err neg.

Case: I find case turns are generally very strategic. For other case args, unless you connect case pics to a larger strategy, they are unlikely to majorly effect my decision.

Ask questions of me if anything is unclear.