Parson,+Daniel

Hello! This is my 8th year coaching in the great state of Wyoming. Our team hits about 13 tournaments a year in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah. I have judged at the NFL Nationals tournament the last 7 years so we have that take on things. I mostly work with LD on our team, but I have the basics of CX down pretty well and have judged a lot of rounds over the years. I deeply love all 3 forms of debate and think each one is distinct from the others. I am your basic run-of-the-mill middle income High School Biology teacher and forensics coach, with pretty liberal political views on the world, but I don’t let those leanings influence my decisions in a round. I think passionate debate argued with conviction is a ton of fun to watch. Obviously competitors should keep it appropriate, but let’s not plaster a fake smile on and try to “out nice” each other! It’s a debate after all! I do think a professional look and demeanor is important and if the round is a tie Ill vote on that (I have yet to do this but it’s possible). LD – To me this is a philosophical debate around a value premise, weighted by a criterion, with contentions used to prove/support the overall argument. Therefore, I don’t like theory, spreading, plans, ect. Folks, we already have CX debate and I love it! We don’t need another version of it for kids who couldn’t find a partner. Win my ballot by deeply understanding the resolution and forming a solid case for affirmation/negation around that. Then argue it well, with conviction, and explain why your opponent’s arguments are weak or flawed. CX – I am really open in CX. I like the game playing aspect of this debate so I’ll vote on just about anything you tell me to…as long as it is logical and real world (this protects the educational nature of what we do and I think it’s important). I seem to pay particular attention to solvency arguments, but off case stuff is fine. Articulate speed is fine but sign post slowly so I can flow. My hearing is not great and I need the help. Analysis of cards is nice and makes me happy. Just because you read it does not make it so – tell me why it does. If the internals of your cards don’t sound like they really fit the analysis you give, and your opponent calls you on that, I’ll probably vote you down on principle. Other than that have fun and argue with a little passion! PF – In my humble opinion, PF is all about persuasion with a little entertainment thrown in! To persuade someone you have to back your points with empirical evidence and analysis that you clearly and deeply understand. To entertain I think you need great CX and rebuttal. I like to see opponents really fire back and forth, set traps, and work as a unified team in CX and I think running an some sort of passionate impact calc toward the end of the round is pretty important since the times are so short. Don’t drop arguments. If they are lame or non-topical explain why.