21.01.2015 Views

here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

I will do my best to vote w<strong>here</strong> the debaters in the round tell me to vote. That requires<br />

more than saying the word "voter," providing a justification - even if it seems incredibly<br />

obvious to you - is critical. It is probably worth noting that I have a negative "knee-jerk"<br />

reaction to positions that are under-developed. In no way does that mean I will not vote<br />

on them, but you will have to give me a pretty convincing reason by the end <strong>of</strong> the debate<br />

to do so. While I do not personally ad<strong>here</strong> to a trichotomy or really any other philosophy,<br />

I will not reject arguments supporting those ideas. Should the debaters fail to provide a<br />

voting mechanism (weighing the arguments and providing a decision calculus), I tend to<br />

default to a policy-maker.<br />

Relative importance <strong>of</strong> presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making<br />

:<br />

I prefer effective debate and that will change depending on any given round. Having the<br />

best argument can be the best form <strong>of</strong> communication, but t<strong>here</strong> is no one way to<br />

communicate. Of course, if I cannot understand you - either because you are not making<br />

sense or are not enunciating (regardless <strong>of</strong> speed) - that is only going to hurt you. If you<br />

are worried about it, it is usually pretty obvious if I'm flowing or not.<br />

Relative importance <strong>of</strong> on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:<br />

Questions like this always seem like a waste <strong>of</strong> time. No one argument can be relied<br />

upon to win every round. Can on-care argumentation be sufficient to win a debate<br />

Certainly, is it always Depends on what is being argued. If you want me to vote solely<br />

on case, then say so, justify that argument and I will. I think that in general a solid<br />

strategy is a well developed on-case and <strong>of</strong>f-case strategy.<br />

Openness to critical/performative styles <strong>of</strong> debating:<br />

If you want me to vote on something, then you need to explain it and tell me why it is<br />

important. I have no problem voting for any position, but if I do not understand it based<br />

on what you tell me in round, then you will have a hard time winning the position.<br />

Any additional comments:<br />

79

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!