Phillips,+Austin

= Austin J. Phillips =

Current JV debater at Illinois College

Debate is a game. While there are a lot of ways to play the game, it is still just a game and as a fan of the game I like to see it played well. I’m pretty open to most arguments, styles, etc. I’d prefer to see you do what you do well than watch you struggle to adapt to what you perceive to be a style of debate I prefer. I strive above all else to maintain objectivity. I like to see debaters deploying arguments that motivate and interest them. With all of that said, below are some general defaults and biases that might hopefully guide your preference making.


 * Specific Arguments **

Policy args are fine with me. I understand them well (simply because I am used to arguing them).

DA’s: Use them. Love them.

Kritiks: Run your evidence as if I have never read your evidence before. I enjoy K’s very much but don’t assume I know what your talking about (even though I probably will) and keep clarifying your argument if it sounds weak.

CP’s: Not a fan, but will judge them as is. Specific CP’s are better.

T: All debate should be tested within and around its boundaries.

Framework/Theory: Please slow down with these arguments. I love them, but not if I can’t understand them, so take your time.


 * Other MIsc: **

Don’t steal prep time! Stealing prep is a voter issue and I will decrease your speaker points. It could cost you the round if it gets out of hand.

Language: Many judges find foul language to be bad, I don’t. I regularly get deducted speaker points at tournament for dropping the ‘f-bomb’ or the alternative word for poop. I WILL NOT penalize you for foul language. However, I have restrictions on how it is used: Don’t direct it at the other team Don’t use denouncing racial language (Not Tolerated, you will lose the round)

If you #hastag something or make me laugh, that’s always a plus with me.