Reddick,+Trevor

I'm a senior and Assistant Coach at Binghamton University. I have 4 years policy debate experience, and was a two time qualifier to the NDT. I debated Lincoln-Douglas style all four years of high school at Half Hollow Hills High School East in Dix Hills, New York (LIFA).

While I am more familiar with critical literature and aspects of debate, I performed both policy and critical arguments on aff and neg extensively throughout my career.

What this means: Do what you do. Just explain it thoroughly and write me a story I can put on my ballot.

I don't have many predelictions towards debate- I think it's all up to the debaters to tell me what my role as a judge is, what my ballot means, how to frame/conceptualize the debate, what impacts to prioritize/evaluate, etc.

With that being said, I've realized that as a former critical debater I tend to hold critical debaters to a higher standard in terms of articulation, examples, and framing in the debate. In effect, the HS rounds I watch resulted in a lot of voting on the permutation in plan-aff's versus kritik. Does this mean the K never won/will win? HELL NO! It simply means I'm not voting neg as soon as "Deleuze" leaves your mouth. I'm intrigued by the discussions going on regarding permutations/counter-perms/competition and look forward to unraveling it with y'all in the debates this year.


 * If you're reading theory and/or T, SLOW DOWN!!! Explain your vision of debate and impact your standards. My hand, flow, and your speaker points will thank you. **

I don't really like to call for cards, thought I do often enough find myself reconstructing portions of the debate when people don't do enough explanation. I've realized that the team which does the most evidence comparison (warrants, context, qualifications, etc.) tends to get excellent speaker points and almost certainly win the debate.

I've realized I give long RFD's and try to give lots of pointers. Sorry in advance.

Lastly, language and argument that is racist, sexist, homophobic, ableist, etc. is unacceptable and punishable with a warning, speaker point deduction, and/or loss depending on the situation, and arguments forwarded in the debate.

Debate is hard work, and thus I will work hard to be the best judge I can for you. The bottom line is to just do what you do best, have fun, and debate well!