here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

clash/warranted arguments; however, I’m up for whatever interpretation makes for the
most compelling round.
Relative importance of presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making
:
I think parli at its best is clean, well-organized, and rhetorically powerful. While I’m a
flow judge who will be looking closely at your analysis and warrants, persuasion is not
based on logic alone. Reasonable speed is ok, but your arguments and presentation
should always remain accessible to a well-educated audience. Spreading is not a
substitute for quality arguments, and superior analysis within a given argument will
usually beat line-by-line.
Relative importance of on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:
Clash is key, although I don’t necessarily care if it happens on-case or off-case. It’s fine
for opp to drop case if the arguments are strong, well-warranted positions and not an
excuse to debate pre-prepped positions instead of dealing with case. Avoid using
procedurals as a strategic ploy and rejecting an opportunity to engage with important and
relevant real-world issues.
Openness to critical/performative styles of debating:
A good Kritik is rare – a strong critical debate sustained throughout the entire round still
rarer. I’m open to listen and vote on a K, but I have a high threshold for a well-argued
critical position. The same is true for performative rounds.
Any additional comments:
A defensive opp team rarely wins my ballot. I usually default to gov if their advocacy is a
good idea and might/will likely work, unless opp goes on the offensive.
Provide analysis for all your arguments! It’s not in your best interests to assume I will
agree with you that being too conservative/liberal/etc. is a bad thing.
152