Paradigm

Gustavo Garcia
Hired Judges

Garcia, Gustavo

University of The Pacific Alum

Me:

He/they

High school debate for 2 years

Did collegiate debate 4 years (Parli & NFA-LD)

Overview:

•I literally don't care how you choose to make arguments, I'm not a cop so I won't come into the room with any predispositions as to how an argument functions. So long as you make it make sense and the argument is weighed across the round you can do whatever you want.

• Cool with partner communication in any event, as long as you don't become a puppet for your partner (only what the speaker says gets put on the flow)

• Speed? Pls not too fast ( keep~300 WPM), I retired from debate and have not kept up. I will lyk if you are going too fast for me

• If using computer, share cards in email chain gusgarcia5397@gmail.com

• Theory of any kind is fine, frivolous theory is kinda funny to watch but my threshold against it is low

• At this point in my life idc if you go with the res or not. Run literally whatever you want

General In-round Judging

I enjoy good clash in round, I know a lot of people say this but I don't want to see "Two ships passing by in the night" as that's just a boring debate to watch. Do a lot of weighing during your speeches and why you are winning the debate and where I should be voting on and you will more than likely have me voting for you if your opponents have neglected to do any of these.

SIGN POST PLEASE I cannot tell you how many otherwise good rounds were ruined by not sign posting and going on the flow. I'm cool with offtime roadmaps and if you need to talk about multiple arguments that are all over the flow I'm okay with that as long as you tell me where you are on the flow.

My general rule is I don't believe in speaker points, so I will give high speaks to everyone in the round, you can um and stutter all you want (I get that nerves are a thing, I won't give you bad speaks for being human or have you not break because of low speaks even tho you had bomb arguments) BUT I will give you low speaks if you are being incredibly rude to your opponents. I may still vote for you because of your arguments, but you will receive low speaks from me. I generally like some light-hearted humor and cleverness in rounds but being a mean person will not leave me with a good impression of you in future rounds. If someone is being mean-spirited towards you put some trust in me to account for that. Other than that I tend to give near perfect speaks to everyone in the round. I feel that if you aren't too worried about speaker points then it brings out a more calm and collected side of you in a debate, just be chill and don't sweat the small stuff as long as you get your point across.

I generally do disclose as long as the tournament hasn't specifically prohibited me from doing so, and if the tournament is running on schedule (lmao doubt that) then I will spend some time to give feedback if both sides would want that. If not then you are welcome to leave the room immediately after the round.

Some Specifics

Topicality: Love it, holding the aff to the resolution can result in some fun debate, but please don't just run a T for the sake of running a T. I am more inclined to vote against you on the T if the aff does a good job of countering it. Usually if you want to run T when I judge, I suggest you stick with it throughout the round. I vote more on articulated abuse but potential abuse will also be voted on if articulated right. Some standards I like to see: Education, Brightline and strat/prep skew with evidence of said abuse happening. RVI's will be voted on if not answered because come on, if you drop an RVI then you deserve to lose lmao.

The K: I am ok with k's of any type on either AFF or NEG. I ran a K 90% of the time in my senior year of college and am comfy with a lot of lit. The k's I ran most were: cap, fem IR, singularity, Biopolitics, transhumanism, Zapatismo, ecomanagerialism, and D&G

I tend to enjoy a good K round as long as some requirements are met:

• Do not assume that I have read your author (even if I have), be clear and treat it as if I am a layman when going through your thesis/framework. Please try your best to be educational throughout your debate instead of drowning us in a flurry of words. Actually APPLY your kritik to the round and the mechanisms by which your alt (or whatever) can resolve

• Make sure the alt is explained as to how it solves, rejecting and embracing is cool, but what does that do?

• Don't do a perf con

• If aff K, please be ready to respond to Framework with reasons that aren't just relinks to your K.

• Mega brownie points if you run a k in public forum (this does not mean you’ll win the round)

Speed: Speed in a debate round is a given, I personally love speed and you should not worry about spreading me out of the round, if I feel that you are too fast tho I will say "slow" or "clear" if you sound like you have a garbage disposal in your mouth. BE THAT AS IT MAY,IF YOU FEEL EXCLUDED because of a debater being too fast and they have done nothing to fix the situation (eg you've told them to slow down numerous times and they haven't) please run a procedural on that. I am VERY receptive to speed theory when it is warranted. If you purposefully exclude your opponent(s) out of the round with speed then the flow no longer becomes an objective view of the round and you will losebecause of this.

Weighing: Idc just make it make sense

Any other questions? Feel free to ask me before the round!