Dunham,+Haley

My name is Haley Dunham, I’m a debater from Bakersfield California where I did LD in high school for four years. (I’m the one with the purple hair) I’m currently a policy debater for Weber State University but this is my first year in the activity of policy debate. I view debate as a very important activity that provides students education and opportunities they would not otherwise receive, treat this activity with the respect it deserves. My favorite debates are the rounds in which the debaters are truly passionate about their advocacy; nothing is more fantastic or inspiring than watching kids revolutionize the world via the debate space and really caring about what they’re talking about. That being said, I’m fine with any types of arguments you’d like to run as long as you both understand them and can explain them. As long as your arguments are smart, well thought out, somewhat true, and generally nice I am willing to listen to them. One of the most enjoyable things about this activity is I’m always learning something new, and thus I am open to hearing new or untraditional arguments. Be very clear about what the round comes down to. What should I be voting on and why have you won that argument? This makes the voting process much easier for me at the end of round. Make sure you emphasize the warrants in cards and do full extensions of arguments, ensure that you really know your cards/ literature before you stand up and read it. Make sure to be doing proper impact analysis (yes even in LD) and showing me how you and only you solve back for those impacts if you want my ballot. Saying “we should do this for reasons x, y, and z” isn’t good enough. I really enjoy overviews at the beginning of speeches, they give me a sense of the direction of the speech and often (when done correctly) solidify why you’re winning the round/ why they’re not. They also make arguments easier to follow and usually explain and break down the debate making it easier for me to fill out my ballot. K debate: When I did LD in high school I was a K debater, so I’m down for your critical lit, but you need to know it backwards and forwards. It’s your responsibility as a debater to ensure you can recite these arguments accurately and concisely otherwise listening to you will be a nightmare. If you can’t explain your far-out, super dense argument to someone who’s never heard it before, how can you expect me to feel confident enough to vote for it? And if you don’t understand your own argument you certainly can’t explain it. Read the literature of your arguments fully and to understanding so that I don’t have to. When done correctly, I truly enjoy good LD K debate. You need to be doing a lot of work on the alt, really proving to me why this is the best method and what the world of the alt looks like. If I don’t buy the alt the K just became an uphill battle for both of us. Don’t make me do this work for you. Identity args need to be contextualized outside of just you as the debater, feel free to talk about yourself as a debater but I also want to know how these args relate back to the debate space as a whole as well as society at large. Good identity teams should have no problem doing this. Plans: Sure, run them if you want. I’ll vote on your plan. Just make sure you do it well, you only have 6 minutes, make sure those cards are money because you won’t have time to spit out a lot of them. Show me why the plan is a good idea and why I have no reason not to vote for it. Counterplans: CP/DA isn’t my favorite strat but I’ll sit through it and maybe even vote on it if you do it right. I need a solid net-bene, and no that’s not a perm. I prefer a couple good cards over a lot of okay ones. But I’ll probably look bored. T/Theory: I hate how theory has become trendy in LD, I prefer it’s saved to call out actual abuse. Running four different theory shells because you don’t know how to answer a critical aff isn’t impressive. If theory is you’re default strat because you’re just so good at it than I’ll listen to it but I’ll probably look bored. You need to have good standards with good well thought out links and you need to extend everything properly every speech. I vote on good RVIs that turn voters. Framework: Good framework debate in LD is hard to come by, I’d love to hear some good philosophy debate instead of “my standard is a pre-req to theirs”, some real analysis on why certain moral code fail logically and pragmatically as well as why your standard value holds in the face of true clash. I’ll totally vote on framework on the top if it’s done right.


 * Other stuff you should know in front of me:** 1. tags are read different than author which are read different than cards which are read different than analytics, i'm probably not looking at you when you talk (i'm looking at my flow) if you keep the same speed/tone for everything you read it will become a jumbled mess when i try to process your words 2. I don't flow on my computer i only use it for tabroom purposes and I don't bring flow paper/pens to tournaments (that's not my job) so if you want me to flow provide me with paper/pens so i can write things down 3. I don't wanna time your speeches/prep, keep track of your own prep time/how much you have left

I’m not super generous with speaks, but I’ll give you what I think you deserve. If you do a good job and I wouldn’t mind seeing you get a speaker award I might even give you a 30. Debate is an academic activity, work hard and really think about the validity of your arguments rather than trying run a squirrelly strat. Be nice to each other, make this a learning experience and try to have the best, most beneficial debate possible. Good luck!