Jump to content

ItAintRalphTho

Member
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

ItAintRalphTho last won the day on August 26 2016

ItAintRalphTho had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

105 Excellent

About ItAintRalphTho

  • Rank
    Varsity

Profile Information

  • Name
    David L
  • School
    Littleton HS
  1. I'm moving to NY this summer for college and I'm trying to find some tournaments to judge during the school year to keep me involved with policy and maybe make some extra bucks. I'm going to be at Bronx and Edgemont, but does anyone have some other suggestions for good CX tournaments in the NYC/Westchester area? Also, if anyone knows of high schools in Westchester county that could use some card cutting or coaching, please let me know! (I'll be in Bronxville/Yonkers, if that helps)
  2. real talk, I ran satire maverick last tournament and went 3-3. the way I do it is a satirical approach to a traditional policy aff like bulk data or something, that says that following the resolution will result in the USofA being laid to waste by the russians or the chinese or terrorists, and I make sure to include extinction as the impact. then i read a bunch of baudrillard and related evidence that basically says that the political is dead 'af, and debate is a form of theater and that constructing these threats is probably bad. I basically say that imagining the state getting lit up is the best way to disengage from our pursuit of "perfect politics" and that stirring the ideological pot is good. make sure u have perm blocks, and maybe a good response to ableism.. (i havent had it run on me yet, but theres definitely a link).
  3. same team read preciado before SVDP lol
  4. Weber State is very inexpensive, and had some very high quality lab leaders from USC to the University of Pittsburgh. It's very much an all around focus, as opposed to zeroing in on specific arguments. You'll have a vast array of talent, too. From novices to bid level varsity debaters. I've gone to the 3 week camp 2 years in a row, and both helped me become a better debater and I made great memories and friends. They are also very accommodating to everyone. First year my wallet was stolen, and 2 days later I had it back, while this past summer, after suffering a stroke, the staff communicated with the RAs to inform them of my condition, in case of an emergency. Also, the lab leaders will be 1000% willing to put in a good word for you if you're looking at college debate. It may not be the flashiest camp, but if you want intensive work on skills, with great leaders, WSDI is a bargain. Lab Leaders: 9/10 (wonderful people, wonderful instruction) Evidence: 6 or 7/10 (leaves something to be desired, but gets you started, at least) Skill Development: 8/10 (i improved by leaps and bounds both years) Lectures: 9/10 (solid as hell) Tournament: 8/10 (solid, efficient, fun) Facilities: 9/10 (super clean, comfortable lab rooms and lecture halls) Town: 6.5/10 (has essentials, but not particularly exciting) Food: 6/10 (sodexho, so its kind of like eating the color grey) Dorm cleanliness/comfort: 10/10 (very new, very very clean, with laundry!) Things to do outside of debate: 9/10 (frequent movie nights, volleyball, pool, bowling, etc) Strictness: 6/10 (a little too strict on floor checks.....) Weather: 9/10 (dry, sunny, v warm) People: 200/10 (surrounded with the most amazing people and met my best friend at WSDI, so I have a definite emotional attachment)
  5. lol GBN went for the K? next thing you know SVDP will run drones! in all honesty, im sure GBN does plenty of K stuff but i've never seen them go for anything other than the politics DA
  6. so i guess there was merit to what i said on aff, so here goes neg: have 4 neg strats. 1. Policy aff with extinction impacts 2. Policy aff with systemic impacts 3. Critical aff with identity focus 4. Critical aff with theory focus off of these, you can begin to develop strong arguments that fit the in-between affs or affs that don't fit under any of those 4 categories. those are just to give you a general direction as to where to go. next, pick things you know. do not spread yourself too thin. that's what I've been doing for too long now, and I've paid dearly. don't overthink it. go with your instincts. even if a team spends 30 seconds on ASPEC and 4:00 on baudrillard in the 1AR, go with your gut if you know you understand baudrillard better, instead of relying on the logic of the situation. this may or may not have happened to me. Learn what youre good at and perfect it as much as you can. I've just started doing it this year and I so wish i could go back and do it again. lastly-- enjoy every second of it. it'll be hard, but learn from everything and embrace the time you have with the activity best of luck
  7. Ballot K, Deleuze, and outing turns case
  8. I read baudrillard apoc rhet and shadowboxing a lot, but doesn't baudrillard often invalidate experiences of oppression in the academy?
  9. Hi everyone, I've been questioning some strategies for quite some time now, and I've realized that the standard cap/FW/no spillover strat against identity-based arguments can be pretty invalidating and sometimes violent, so I'm trying to find alternative ways of engaging them. I have a relatively developed strategy vs queer and fem ID args, but confronting race arguments is a different story. Any ideas?
  10. hey yall, my partner and I are attending the Omaha Westside tournament in a couple weeks, and I'm coming to realize that there is nary a soul attending this tournament that either of us know at all. We are the only team from our school, and our coach will be judging most of the time there. is it within good etiquette to try to get to know people we debate against or is that kinda invasive? this may sound fickle, but tournaments can be miserable when there's nobody to talk to outside of round.
  11. @OP: first, you definitely shouldn't ask any of your teammates, because lets be honest, the only thing Kent Denver runs that's remotely critical is Lacan/Stavrakakis, and yall kick it EVERY TIME and go for heg good. but real talk, if you want to beat the other Colorado teams, none of them (aside from littleton) have responses to baudrillard that go beyond "postmod bad". also, hit up Ian Dalton from East or just ask Denzler (yall know he went for the K in HS. PICK HIS BRAIN).
  12. @OP: first, you definitely shouldn't ask any of your teammates, because lets be honest, the only thing Kent Denver runs that's remotely critical is Lacan/Stavrakakis, and yall kick it EVERY TIME and go for heg good. but real talk, if you want to beat the other Colorado teams, none of them (aside from littleton) have responses to baudrillard that go beyond "postmod bad". also, hit up Ian Dalton from East or just ask Denzler (yall know he went for the K in HS. PICK HIS BRAIN).
  13. get friendly with folks in your circuit. they'll often be willing to help you out. also, contact your lab leaders from camp and see if they're willing to help you understand certain arguments. I've been experiencing the same thing for 3 years now, but I'm in CO, so probably not to the same degree of competition that exists in TX. What I've found the most success with is: 1. Write a "small" (no openev equivalent) aff that is very borderline topical with no apocalyptic impacts (systemic violence impacts are great). prep the HELL out of T. block out every word of the resolution, and make an index of all the possible standards. i mean ALL of them. Block out answers to the voters and then do counter-standards, and if you're feeling gutsy, a call for an RVI - you might sacrifice speaks, but it forces a small timeskew and creates an incentive for neg to not go for T. 2. Put the 1AC and 2AC extensions and blocks in the same file, and organize it very neatly with verbatim. (use pockets to separate Case and answers to T, FW, DAs, Ks, and use hats to differentiate different subcategories. This saves lots of time and allows for specific blocks to be written instead of searching your dropbox for the "AT: Framework" file. 3. Critical affs are a little more conducive to this, as you won't have as many straight-up disads to prep out, also, disads to K affs usually don't have much work to do as far as UQ goes, so this can be helpful and takes some labor off you. 4. As much as it may pain you... post (at least) your aff on the wiki. It's the ethical thing to do, and it prevents disclosure theory from getting run on you 5. this being said, don't post 2AC answers to the wiki. also, maybe incorporate a narrative into the 1AC, which by no means needs to be included in the wiki entry, and can make your arguments marginally foggier to teams prepping you out. I'll post a little more on neg later if people think there's any merit to what i'm saying on aff lol
  14. will trade Psychoanalysis and/or Buddhism for the death K
×
×
  • Create New...