Jump to content

katoman

Member
  • Content Count

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

About katoman

  • Rank
    Coach/Judge
  • Birthday 01/25/1988

Profile Information

  • Name
    John
  • School
    KU
  • Interests
    DEBATE, video games
  • Occupation
    Grad Student

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    jpmoney4346
  1. "you are winning on the flow. but perceptually they are winning and i like their charisma." judge paradigm when asked was policy flow oriented.... and it was a final round im probably just bitter and its not really funny but w/e. a funnier one i saw once was "thorium fuel is proliferation resistant." that was all the ballot was. neg won. proliferation was never in the round besides a sentence in one of the aff's 1ac cards.
  2. it wont even hit commitee till the 15th either so it probably will take at min -2 weeks to hit the presidents desk and thats assuming everything goes smoothly.
  3. washburn has a pretty bad ass parli team. you should look into it.
  4. well... im surprised he didn't address the classic argument of "you were dressed slutty thus you were askin for it."
  5. wave the wii remote to the left and right to execute a slash properly.
  6. Judge: i vote aff because parametrics is fun!
  7. 1. the ability to read, a skill that shocking many do not possess. 2. the ablity to express my thoughts in a rational matter when writing papers and presenting information to classes and peers. 3. Free M.A. (fingers crossed) 4. oh and 500 dollars a semester. not 2 shabby
  8. "who ever says the word pirates the most gets 30 speaker points" and most likely the ballot.
  9. Question What is the best way to get used to spreading? watch videos of NDT/Ceda rounds. most if not all the nfa-ld round online are slow rounds and not worth watching save for case/argument construction. attempt to flow, if you cant flow it yet just listen. half the problem is getting it so you brain can make out the words them selves once thats accomplished its not hard mastering getting it on paper. Question What is the typical structure of a case? two formats comparative advantage and stock issues. competitive policy is almost always comparative advantage example Inherency 1.not happening now 2.no movements to fix x policy Plan pass x policy Solvency 1. passing x policy requires fed action 2. some other solvency card 3. solvency card Adv1 G warming 1.uniqueness 2.link 3.internal link 4.impact advantage 2 hedge 1.uniqueness 2.link 3.internal link 4.impact Question What is the general proportion of decent arguments? im not sure what you mean by decent nor in what context. in high school i saw some of the wankiest stuff i have seen in my debate career. if going by a standard of evidence quality you will find high school has a surprising lack thereof. if you want hedge da politic senerios and state cps and the like your going to be happy, if you think bad arguments are say k's in general you will not be so happy as well. in all honestly the proportion completely depends on your area, some places have different meta's then others. mine was k heavy, other parts of the country the k is the "devils tool" and judges dont like it so teams dont use it. on the subject of NFA-ld. it is actually at high levels of competition filled with speed as well as kritical arguments. the problem being that really only happens on the 2-3 tournaments that occur during the year were the entire field is present. like OSU-otterbein during the first semester, and Webster U's and the national tournament during the second semester. other wise its very much a luck of the draw how strong the tournament competition and judging will be. not saying it doesn't happen but that's just my experience from the last 4 years of competition. its a fun format but requires significant adaptation of "traditional" development of arguments with the loss of the neg block and final rebuttal.
  10. katoman

    Reality Check

    hhhmmmm next years NFA ld topic is mental health. this tread works perfect for an introduction to a reforming Juvenal mental health diagnosis practices case.
  11. how do you or your school approach recruitment? i have been looking for new methods for my own program as to prepare the new team leadership when my self and my fellow seniors finally graduate college. do you use a passive strategy? just post a flyer and wait for those that have genuine interest to find the team? or an active strategy? pros/cons you have found with certain strategies would be most help full as well.
  12. gap inherency good/bad, constitutionality bad/good, hypotesting good/ bad (aka multi world), rvi good/bad. Con Con good/bad. shifting frameworks good/bad. Perm is a position of advocacy good / bad (yes its archaic as hell but you would be surprised the wins you can get of it).
  13. eh not entirely true. i have seen some funny topicality arguments using a card like surbig is wanting. now should you use it for what i am about to describe no, its technical and theoretically im pretty sure has no basis. read substantially def with the card violation is your not a substantial chance from obama policies insert another violation for substantially only. standards ground- your loss comes from the fact since its not a significant chance you politic da's lose substantial strength since action is close to status quo action insert other random standards here. you set this up in cross-x like your looking for a politics link, bait them into saying obama is doing things similar in nature but not this specific policy etc people hate politics they will do anything they can to try to preempt your link story for a judge. you get your violation, then just be ready for the obvious we meet that obama isn't doing this and thats significant change.. you dig in on the cross-x answer and why substantial change is not equal to something were not doing currently, but more of overarching policy action and how that's abusive to ground. probably should run a tix da with it for the in round abuse imo. its not the best argument for the broad hs topic, its fun as hell for constrictive country specific topics, like x nation ones. such as cuba. for instance it would look something like A. Interp/def 1. sub= 30% or w/e crap people run 2. card analysis= obama/gov is already trending towards so plan must be a significant change from the current trending towards addressing poverty b. violations 1. you must be a significant change in OBAMA/gov poverty policies not previous policies 2. ur not 30% or w/e i just like multi violations because people cant flow c. blah blah blah insert generic standards/voters here 1. ground- definatly want ground, its where you will most likely have to sit if you collapse to it.
  14. debate is like foot ball, except sometimes the other team decides to play musical instruments and claim they should win the football game, and sometimes do. thus were created bands i mean the K Judge adaptation. personally i use a scene from the great debaters to discuss why adaptation is important to novices i coach. the one by the river with denzel in a boat. if you haven't seen it, hes running through a speaking drill with his kids about the judge being god because they wield the decision etc,that scene is literally the only one in the movie that is any good imo...debate wise
×
×
  • Create New...