Andrew McCarty -- The Blake School

Use the back button on your browser to return to the pref entry page or tournament entry list. The judge philosophy appears in a different format at the bottom of the page.

Judging philosophy:

McCarty, Andrew

I debated for three years at the Blake School in Minneapolis and I am in my fourth year of debate at Wake Forest University.

Generally, this is how I approach judging debates.

1. Voting aff means the plan is superior to the status quo and any competitive policy option.
2. Topicality is a voting issue and never a reverse voting issue.
3. Impact evaluation and comparison is crucial. Whichever team is controlling the frame is likely the team that is going to win.
4. "Uniqueness determines the direction of the link" is not very compelling. Uniqueness is never definite. If the neg wins a link, then voting aff increases the probability of the disad.
5. Offense/Defense makes the most sense for most impact evaluations, but there are notable exceptions. Teams that actively attempt to strategically alter this frame will be rewarded.
6. I will only determine the quality of an argument after I determine if it was responded to.
7. Qualifications matter, like, a lot.
8. Teams should be prepared to debate about debate to a certain extent. That said, I am heavily on the side of debate being an worthwhile and educational activity, and I feel uncomfortable being asked to endorse a movement or a project given sufficient debating by the other team.
9. Reasonability seems to be the most potent way to refute a majority of topicality arguments. Ever since I put "I default to competing interpretations" in my philosophy, teams have refused to go for reasonability in front of me, mostly to their detriment. I have voted neg on T a lot more than I anticipated.
10. Permutations are a test of competition unless otherwise stated. Advocating permutations is a very uphill battle.
11. Legitimate – conditionality, PICs, states, international actor.
12. Questionable – consult, condition, delay, agent, floating PIKs.
13. Illegitimate - object fiat, individual actor fiat, world peace, utopian fiat
14. Reject the team, not the arg – conditionality, dispositionality, topicality.
15. Reject the arg, not the team – agent CPs, states CPs, international CPs, PICs, no neg fiat, consult, condition, delay, severance perms, intrinsic perms, framework, cheap shots.
16. Things that will get you good speaker points: humor, situational/strategic awareness, aggressive strategies, not stealing prep.

Seasonal voting record:

TourneyDivRdAFF    NEG    Decision

Judge Philosophy Alternate Format: