Turnage,+Joshua

I’m a pretty nice guy and so I make it my aim to help everyone out before and after the round. If you ever desire to know my opinion on a particular issue or want my advice on something, please feel free to ask. As a general rule I will treat you with great respect and I ask that you reciprocate.

T and Framework:

I can be convinced that a plan is not topical, but A). show in-round abuse and B). explicitly tell me what new affs the affirmative would justify. I generally lean towards reasonability. I think that education in debate is inevitable, so a limits standard is the most convincing standard in my opinion. Go for framework if you have nothing else to go for, but I prefer substance.

Performance/Movements/Advocacy Affs:

Not affirming a resolution allows you to say the USFG is a horrible, horrible thing so please take advantage of this and use it as offense against framework. I do not believe my vote AGAINST you will make you or other teams discontinue your running of performance/advocacy affs and I certainly don’t believe that the neg is going to use what they’ve learned in debate to change the world or the government’s policies. I lean aff when it comes to issues of framework.

K’s:

Although most of my in-round debate career was centered on politics DAs and CPs, I read a good deal of critical lit out of round. If you’re aff and you hit the Cap K, saying case outweighs or reading one or two turns probably won’t convince me. Regardless of what K the negative runs, you should respond with substantive answers and not just realism good/inevitable or USFG good. Nietzsche, Deep Eco, Heidegger, Queer Theory, Cap and Feminism are all good Ks to read in front of me and I’m familiar with the literature. Psychoanalysis Ks and Baudrillard Ks are not my cup of tea, but I will most certainly vote on them if explained well. I also really like “K turns the aff” analysis in the 2NR.

DAs:

Politics DAs are silly and probably not true but it makes for a very large and difficult to beat DA that you should be running. I’m pretty much game on any DA as long as they have a specific link scenario.

CPs:

I don’t particularly like consult, process or condition CPs and think they are probably abusive. Other than that I’m open to whatever.

2NR/2AR Analysis

I try to protect negatives by sticking the 2AR to what the 1AR said in their speech. Overviews for how I should view the round are incredibly important in my opinion. If you do not do impact analysis I will not do the work for you.