From: Raj Ghoshal <rghosha@emory.edu>
To: Phil Kerpen <pgkst5@imap.pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: Call for Judging Philosophies
here you go phil--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Raj Ghoshal
Emory University
Hi. My name is Raj. I debated 4 years in Illinois and now debate at
Emory. I've judged about 25 rounds on this topic.
Topicality: It's okay. If you're winning it go for it.
Counterplans: Most kinds of counterplans are okay as long as you are able
to defend them well. Dispositionality, partial plan inclusiveness,
one-actor international fiat, consultation CPs, and agent CPs all may or
may not be legitimate depending on who debates their legitimacy better,
but I am likely to have a moderately high threshhold for voting against a
team just for running a CP like this. I am a little less friendly toward
conditionality, and not too friendly at all toward multiple-actor
international CPs, delay CPs, etc. These are merely my predispositions;
they are not rules, or anything close to rules. In general the more
theoretically sketchy the CP, the more theoretically sketchy permutations
become okay.
Kritiks: Like 'em. Doesn't mean I'm necessarily going to vote for them
more than anybody else. Debating the specifics of the kritik is crucial
for both teams (links, impacts, implications); the "Deconstruction Bad"
block your coach wrote 4 years ago isn't good enough to win you the
debate. Running kritiks that your disads link to may or may not be okay
depending on how you well you can defend this practice . . . oh yeah. If
you're running a pretty high-tech kritik (say, Heidegger) you should
definitely sound like you know what you're talking about--there are few
things worse than bad kritik debates.
"Normal" issues: Nothing unusual here. Impact analysis is important.
Communication issues: Speed is fine. Clarity is key. Persuasion matters.
If you can be funny you should be. IF YOU CAN'T PLAY NICE, DON'T PLAY AT
ALL. If someone from New Trier is reading this, please post this up next
to my picture on the wall--there is nothing like having a shrine . . .
|
