Smale,+Bee

  Bee Smale   They/Them pronouns  4 yrs - East Kentwood High School  4 yrs - Indiana University  Current - GTA @ Wayne State University, Argument Coach @ Cabot High School  Yes on the email chain: bsmale95@gmail.com   Updated 4/18/17   <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Intro <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">I just finished my last year of competitive debate. I will still be in the community. I altered my entire philosophy about debate my senior year of debating. As a reflection of how I now think about debate, I have entirely redone my philo for the TOC this year. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Philosophy <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">Debate is a competitive game that is not disconnected from external spaces. Arguments don't win rounds, debaters do. Do you, Im here to facilitate your experience, I had my turn and now its yours. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Background <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">Most of my debate career was k-focused. In my last year of debate, we read mostly policy args on the neg. I gave some hot 1nrs on the politics DA. I also wrote our T-Sub file. So Ill listen to whatever. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> TL:DR <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">Do your thing. I anticipate being in a lot of KvK or clash debates. Im also interested in watching policy v. policy rounds, but pref me at your own peril. I will vote on framework. I will vote on debate bad. I really don't care at this point. I am moreso concerned with the community, or lack thereof, of debate. Some of my best friends in debate defend the wall, some are revolutionaries. The content of argument is less important to me then your ability to actualize debate as a home. That means bing kind, funny and welcoming will be rewarded. Being hostile will not. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Framework <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">Sometimes its the most strategic arg to read, especially if the 1AC has no implicit answer to TVA. Debate is a game. Its not isolated from the rest of the world. Fairness is an internal link, not an impact. I would say these things are up for debate, but have yet to hear a compelling reason why any of these claims are not true. You can try if you want. I don't understand truth testing as a presumption argument. I don't understand aff is a pre-requisite arguments. Suggesting a TVA exists is not the same as making a TVA arg. TVA args don't have to be answered individually unless you are criticizing the content of the resolution and to just the form of debate. In that case, you need to answer individual TVAs. Generic lefty policy affs are not generic TVAs. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Perms (K v. K) <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">The K debate community is facing a crisis of scholarship that is known as the permutation. I do not know what role the permutation should play moving forward. However, it is clear that as the community gets deeper and deeper into their respective literature bases, the permutation bulldozes the actual nuances that are core disagreements in the literature. Clearly in very polemical debates like baudrillard v. sexton or cap v. fem, permutations are valuable discussions. However, in more nuanced debates, it seems to hinder actual engagement, like afro-optimism v. afro-pessimism or baudrillard v. baudrillard. Im not sure how to resolve this, but be aware I probably wont reject polemical perms out of hand but can be convinced that if the negative strategy is a nuanced disagreement in the same field of literature, the perm shouldn't exist. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Risk Framing <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">Zero Risk is a thing. Defensive arguments are not always terminal, i.e. some internal link defense, if true, may take our the whole advantage, but some makes it less probable. Know what type you are going for and do impact calc accordingly. Try or Die doesn't make sense in a world where everyone dies as a function of life. Win your impact is actually probable. Complexity theory means I should presume least change if all impacts are very unlikely to happen. I hate math. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Fiat <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">IT DOESN'T EXIST. If the other team is reading an epistemology or ontology K, reasserting that the plan is a good idea wont do much for you. Instead, defend your model of debate and why its good to learn about the plan. You do it on the neg when u go for framework, so just do it on the aff! I will not vote on aff outweighs the K (unless its a K that fiats an alt), but will easily vote for our defense of policy making as a method is good. If the K fiats an alt (like beyond stuff that is accessible to the debaters or judges in the round) then go for it, you defs get the plan. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> CPs <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">If the aff doesn't use fiat, the neg only gets fiat if they have a robust defense of fiat based debate. You are less likley to win that you fiated CP solves the K aff then that you fiated CP represents a better method for dealing with the problems set out by the aff (policymaking good, simulation good, ect.) In every instance where you think a fiated CP is a good idea I can almost guarantee that framework is a better option. If both are in the 1NC you are wasting time. <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;"> Pronouns <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"> <span style="background-color: #fefefe; font-family: open_sans,Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: middle;">I will drop teams for misgendering people. If it happens in the 2ar, I will ask whoever was misgendered if they would like me to consider it in my decision. If I get misgendered, do not expect satisfactory speaker points or fair consideration. Gender dysphoria is a real think that actual makes it materially harder to function when it hits. Sorry? <span style="font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">