King,+Liam

Background: I debated for 4 years at C.K McChlatchy high school on the national circuit. I am currently attending the University of Nevada Las Vegas as a sophomore.

How I frame debate: I think that debate is a game of execution. I vote for the team who better executes and interacts with the other team's arguments. I am open to most arguments, be they traditional policy arguments or weirder critical arguments, as long as they are presented in a way that makes sense and can be applied to what the other team is saying. For more specific opinions, I have listed them below.

High school topic - I've done almost no research on this topic, so the excessive use of acronyms or references to "cores on the topic" should be explained at least a little in the debate.

Speed - I'm fine with you going fast, just not being insanely unclear. Your speaker points will suffer or be rewarded accordingly. I go by the 3 strikes rule. If I have to 3 clear more than 3 times, I will put down my pen and stop flowing until you fix the issue.

Kritik - I am pretty familiar with the more common args like Cap, Security, and Anthro as I ran them pretty frequently in high school as a 2n. I am much less familiar Nietzsche and Heidegger esque arguments and therefore require a bit more explanation. If you are going for the Kritik in front of me, you need to remember two things. First, don't substitute K jargon for actual analysis and spin. Second, the alt. The alt is almost always the weakest part of the Kritik, and therefore requires the most explanation. I will reward aff teams that call people out on this and reward neg teams even more for effectively defending it. I think that it is also worth noting that I am a sucker for social justice type arguments, especially when they are specific to an aff or specific to the topic.

CP- I'm all for cheating but I definitely think that some CP are dumber than others. If you are going for a Consult, Conditions, Amendments, Lopez, Delay, or Veto Cheto CPs, be careful. I think that these kind of CP are silly from both a competitive and a theoretical standpoint and that aff teams need to exploit that. That being said, I love me an aff specific PIC. It tells me that you (probably) did research on the other team's aff and you should be rewarded because of it. If you are aff going against a CP, I rarely think that theory specific to a CP is a reason to reject the team, however, I definitely think it means that I give you some more weight to the permutation or solvency deficits.

DA - How could you hate DAs? While I am all for a case and DA debate, I think that these debates can fall prey to two issues. First, I think that these debates become more of a card reading contest than an actual debate. To remedy this, I think that the negative needs to do both evidence comparison and try to answer an aff arg with analytics, spin, and a card, instead of substituting the first two with more cards. Second, I don't think that all DAs were born equal, and I do buy card-less "gut check" arguments. I think it is worth mentioning that I do believe there is a such thing as a 0% risk of a DA, or at least there is a percentage that is so abysmally small that it is not worth considering.

T - Love love love T. I think it is a very strategic, but also under used argument in debate. Run it. I default to competing interps. Aff your evidence better be good on this.

Misc stuff worth noting - I do not call for cards unless it falls into one of both of the following issues. First, to settle an ethical issue within the evidence. Second, to settle a factual claim, like the economy has recovered by 5%. The phrase "this card is really good" or "this card does the debating for us" is not an argument. Debate is a game of execution, not reading cards. My standard for both of these things is very high and I will very rarely ask to see a piece of evidence.

Pet Peeves This is a list of miscellaneous stuff that debaters do that infuriate me to no end. -The underview. Either end your speech or do something, literally anything, other than this. If you have to pause and think about weather what you are about to do is an underview, it probably is. -Tech issues. Yall are old enough to understand how to put a flash drive in a computer. Make this as efficient as you reasonably can. -Gotcha moments that aren't gotcha moments. If I had a dollar for every time someone said "the debate is over" when it wasn't, I wouldn't need the money I get from judging. -Rudeness. You aren't nearly as good as you think you are, and there is no excuse to ever disrespect your opponent.

Speaker Points - I evaluate speaker points according to the following criteria. 30 - You made me laugh, cry, and reconsider my standing in life. You showed up with 37 pieces of flair. And a terrific smile. You did very specific analysis, gave me a clear picture of what happened in the round and why you won, and executed your strategy flawlessly. 29 - You impressed me with your ability to execute your arguments, make specific spin to theirs, and showed me that you are well versed in what you are going for. 28 - You were an above average speaker. Good for the most part, but clearly suffered from some issues in the round. 27 - Meh. You were an average speaker with an incoherent strategy. 26 - You are an okay debater for the most part, but something went critically wrong in the round for me to give you this. 25-20 - You really need to fix something. You are an okay debater, but you either insulted me, the other team, or someone else in a way that was truly offensive and executed your strategy so poorly that I didn't even think you were making an argument. Me giving you something this low is meant to send a very clear message: Whatever you did, don't ever do it again. Anything below 20 - What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in the room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you with this amount of speaker points, and may God have mercy on your soul.