by Harrison Durland | Feb 12, 2021 | Soapbox
This post is part of a series:See part 1 hereSee part 2 hereSee part 3 here Throughout this series, I’ve been setting the stage for and summarizing Pragmatism as an expansive paradigm/weighing mechanism for a judge to make decisions in debate (among other things, such...
by Harrison Durland | Dec 11, 2020 | Soapbox
Government team: “The purpose of debate is to have civil discussions about the topics before us.” Opposition team: “No, the primary purpose of competitive debate should be fair competition.” And so I listened as the teams spent chunks of the debate trying to debate...
by Harrison Durland | Sep 9, 2019 | For Alumni, Judging/Judges, Soapbox, Team Policy
In the previous article in this series, I broadly described hybrid and purist judging approaches, but I didn’t dive into comparing the approaches’ pros and cons. Thus, I will devote this article to outlining some of the main arguments I see for and against each...
by Harrison Durland | Aug 16, 2019 | For Alumni, Judging/Judges, Soapbox
Yes, I absolutely used to sneer at community judging—as well as anything else that I didn’t see as very flow-heavy and “objective.” Thus, in high school I resolved that when I returned to judge policy debate I would be a righteous and noble flow monk, steadfast in...
by Isaiah McPeak | Feb 1, 2011 | Example Rounds, Briefs, and Case Studies, From Advanced to National-Class, Strategy, Video
In quarterfinals at NCFCA Nationals 2010, Josiah McPeak and Patrick Shipsey were negative against a team that had lost their AFF case once the entire year. Obviously, this team couldn’t be beat on their own ground. Through some in-depth analysis, Patrick and...
