Shimp,+Taure

//Modesto Junior College//


 * About Me:**
 * Competed in NPDA for 3 years.
 * Coached NFA-LD at CSU, Chico for 2 years.
 * Instructor for Argumentation & Debate, Group Communication, Human Communication, Interpersonal, and Public Speaking.


 * The Basics**
 * I am open to any argument.
 * Topicality and Kritiks are fine; run them well and with purpose.
 * Weigh your impacts throughout, tell me why you're winning in the rebuttal.
 * Work hard, be humble. Ego and condescension will cut your speaker points in half.


 * General Philosophy**

Organization: Structure is hugely important to me. I want to hear roadmaps and taglines...label everything, especially when you are making refutation on-case. If you are running a Disad, don't jump into uniqueness without slapping a tagline on it first. I want to know where you are and where you're going on the flow.

Content: For me, the debate round is what the debaters choose to make of it. I will entertain any argument, but Disads, Topicality, Kritiks etc. need to be fully articulated and impacted out. I enjoy a good T debate, but I find AFF reasonability arguments highly persuasive. I generally don't consider T worthy of being an RVI. In the rebuttals, weigh your impacts through the Net-Ben criterion and tell me where you're winning on the flow. If there are dropped arguments, it's critical that you highlight and extend them. Don't assume I will do that work for you. At the end of a round, I vote for the debater who has done the best technical and strategic job; not necessarily the debater who has made the most believable argument.

Delivery: Speed is fine, but if you cannot speak with //clarity// please don't go fast. If your speech involves a lot of gasping and incomplete enunciation, it starts to feel like a waste of time. Use CX wisely; get clarification and ask questions that set up your arguments. Your skill and strategy here count toward your speaker points.