2012 Canyon County Comprehensive
Skyview/Nampa High Schools - Nov 16-17 | Status: Completed
Judge Philosophies
Alan Alexander - Vallivue
n/a
Alan Hines - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Alex Barnack - BK
n/a
Alex Lange - Rocky HS
n/a
Amber Drobny - Borah
n/a
Amber Amoureux - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Ana Sanchez - Vallivue
n/a
Ann Veloso - Rocky HS
n/a
Becky Fatzinger - Mtn Home
n/a
Beverly Hines - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Borah Judge - Borah
n/a
Brandi Hayes - Mtn Home
n/a
Brittany Clark - Kuna
n/a
Bruce Schlake - Rocky HS
n/a
Cheryl Sutherland - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Christina Trouten - Mtn Home
n/a
Cody Griffiths - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Daniel Glover - Vallivue
n/a
Dave Holland - Mtn Home
n/a
David Nishimoto - Vallivue
n/a
Evan VV - Vallivue
n/a
Fred Swanstrum - Kuna
n/a
Geoff Thatcher - Renaissance
<div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Background</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">:</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">Competitor in all debate forms for multiple high schools for 4 years</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">Parli competitor for the College of Western Idaho for 1 year</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">Assistant Coach for Renaissance High School for 1 year (CX, LD, PF, IEs)</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> </div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Philosophy</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">:</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">I’m open to new and unique arguments however I believe that both sides still have their respective burdens to prove or disprove the argument. Having said that, I evaluate arguments based both on how those arguments appear on the flow AND how those arguments have been proven within the debate round; so quality of argumentation over quantity. Also if one side drops an argument that argument must have some merit to it to count as a voting issue in the round.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> </div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>CX Issues</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">:</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>T</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> is a fine to run however it should not be used as a time suck.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>SPEC</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> arguments are fine to run once again not to be used as a time suck and you must prove violation to have it be a winning issue </span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>CPs</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> are great </span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Ks</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> are legit for aff and neg unless proven otherwise. I tent to vote on Ks when they are consisted with the neg strategy and don’t contradict itself or the rest of the off-case aurguments</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Impact Calc:</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> probability> magnitude> time frame. Meaning if you have nuke war but there is only a 0.0000001% chance of it happening I will tend not to vote on it</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> </div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>LD Issues</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">:</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">I am most used to a traditional value criterion debate, but I would love to see different strategies.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Ks</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> are legit unless proven otherwise in the round.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Plans</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"> are OK but will take a lot more work</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> </div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>PF Issues</b></span></font><font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">:</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">I am most used to a straight-up fact round debate, but I would love to see different approaches to this form of debate.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">Ks and other various arguments are legit unless proven otherwise in the round.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> </div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">Any other questions, just ask.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> </div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><b>Parli issues:</b></span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">I’m most used to a cx type round, however I understand high school is different than the type done in college.</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">What I’m expecting is slow cx round with salutations at the beginning and a nice debate</span></font></div> <p> </p> <div style="margin: 0px;"> <font color="black" size="4"><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;">Imperial evidence is the best evidence.</span></font></div>
Hayden Jared - Caldwell
n/a
Jeff Stoppenhagen - Columbia
n/a
Jeff Stoppenhagen - Nampa
n/a
Jeff Stoppenhagen - Skyview
n/a
Jeff Stoppenhagen - Weiser ID HS
n/a
Joann King - Mtn Home
n/a
John Coulthard - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Karl Nordstrom - Wood River
n/a
Leslie Litke - Rocky HS
n/a
Lori Palmer - Mtn. View (ID)
n/a
Lyle Hammon - Rocky HS
n/a
Maria Clark - Mtn Home
n/a
Mark Engberson - Rocky HS
n/a
Mary Frances Booth - Rocky HS
n/a
Matt Vraspir - Renaissance
Megan Cox - Rocky HS
n/a
Pamela Hammon - Rocky HS
n/a
Patricia Rose - Kuna
n/a
Rachel Baxa - Rocky HS
n/a
Rhea Safford - Caldwell
n/a
Richard Zuercher - Renaissance
<p> Background:</p> <p> CX competitor for Centennial High School (Boise, ID) for 4 years</p> <p> CX competitor for the College of Idaho for 2 years</p> <p> Parli competitor for the College of Idaho for 1 year</p> <p> Asst Coach for the College of Idaho 3 years (Parli, IEs, IPDA)</p> <p> Head Coach for Renaissance High School for 4 years (CX, LD, PF, IEs)</p> <p> Philosophy:</p> <p> I am usually open to most arguments made in the debate and will leave the debaters the responsibility to both justify their own arguments and attack those of their opponents. Having said that, I evaluate arguments based both on how those arguments appear on the flow AND how those arguments persuade my thinking in the debate round. For instance, a neg team may drop a conditionality bad argument on the flow, but it may not be a voting issue because there was no demonstrable impact in the round. Just because the issue is dropped does not make the issue magically convincing - that work must still be done by the debaters. </p> <p> CX Issues:</p> <p> T is a voting issue unless proven otherwise in the round.</p> <p> SPEC arguments are not a-priori arguments unless proven otherwise in the round.</p> <p> CPs are legit unless proven otherwise in the round. I think Dispo is the most legit way to run a CP, but not necessarily the case. There are a variety of reasons to run CPs in a variety of ways. I don't tend to vote on theory issues unless there is actual in-round abuse. </p> <p> Ks are legit for aff and neg unless proven otherwise. I tent to vote on Ks when they are consistent with the neg strategy. Reading a Statism K while simultaneously running an agent CP seems to defeat the purpose of the criticism and damages your cred. It doesn't mean that I won't vote for it, it just means that you have to do some extra work justifying your contradiction. </p> <p> Impact Calc: I lean on probability before magnitude unless proven otherwise in the round. </p> <p> </p> <p> LD Issues:</p> <p> I am open to a variety of argumentation and strategy. </p> <p> I am most used to a value criterion debate, but I would love to see different strategies and theory.</p> <p> Ks are legit unless proven otherwise in the round.</p> <p> Plans are OK unless proven otherwise in the round.</p> <p> </p> <p> PF Issues:</p> <p> I am open to a variety of argumentation and strategy.</p> <p> I am most used to a straight-up fact round debate, but I would love to see different strategies and theory.</p> <p> Ks and other various arguments are legit unless proven otherwise in the round.</p> <p> </p> <p> Any other questions, just ask.</p>
Robin Navert - BK
n/a
Ryan Brubaker - Meridian
n/a
Sara Bell - Weiser ID HS
n/a
Sarah McIntire - Meridian
n/a
Stacy Bauer - Mtn Home
n/a
Susan Worst - Wood River
n/a
Tabitha Miller - Renaissance
n/a
Tyra Tipple - Borah
n/a