here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

fill in the details (but I could also say the same thing about conservative arguments). But,
if you warrant your arguments or if they don’t question the assumptions
I’ll have no problem voting for any type of argument across the spectrum of extreme left
to extreme right.
3. In terms of more traditional parli theory. I really hope you run policy (not fact or
value) in front of me. I don’t believe in the trichotomy but will vote on it. I love topical
counterplans, ran PICs a lot and would be very happy to see a plan v. counterplan debate.
I also can’t stand fact debate. But, if you want to run procedurals saying the contrary, go
right ahead, but know that I have biases against your argument that I will have to try to
counteract.
4. I won’t vote on a procedural without some sort of demonstrated abuse, but you might
be able to convince me otherwise.
All in all though have a great time and debate the way that you do best, and if you have
any questions for me before or after the round, don’t hesitate to ask. I will fill out my
ballot and be happy to answer any questions that you may have. No need to do any of the
fluffy thank you’s and traditional aspects of parli in front of me unless you are truly
thankful for me being here for a reason besides that I showed up.
Any additional comments:
Siver, Christi
University of Washington
Background of the critic:
My name is Christi Siver and I am a PhD candidate in political science at UW. I have
been helping coach the UW speech and debate team for the past five years. I received my
Master’s in International Relations and International Economics from Johns Hopkins
School of Advanced International Studies in 2002. I received my BA from Lewis and
Clark College, where I competed in CEDA for four years. After graduation I coached
CEDA/NDT at Lewis and Clark through 2000.
Approach of the critic to decision-making (for example, adherence to the trichotomy,
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):
162