Mielke,+Luke

toc =6/28/2011= 1N: You are fast and clear, which is awesome. Try to differentiate more when switching between cards–even though I can hear all the words you are saying, it’s difficult to tell based on your tone when you are starting a new tag. Try saying AND or NEXT or some other connecting word. Good work answering questions in CX, be careful of getting snippy when asking questions. Good job catching the contradiction. Thank you for not taking prep before the 1nr! Also good impact calculus. You do a really good job on the line by line and explaining what the affirmative dropped and why your cards answer their arguments. I think you could do a little more impact calculus (or maybe take more of the DA for your partner). Careful with the econ good/bad contradiction stuff (see 2nc).

=6/29/2011= Milky: 1AC: As I said to the others in the round, you should try to work on pacing your reading speed for a prepared speech like the 1AC. Shoot for maintaining consistent reading speeds. Your taglines were slower but your evidence reading was very fast, and sometimes the differences caused some clarity issues. You’re on the cusp of being fast and clear, but you just need to work on consistency.

1AR: Great coverage during the 1AR. You answered all of their key arguments, extended dropped arguments, (your job), made impact comparisons. At this point you should be working with your partner to predict what the 2NR strategy will be. Try to take some cues from the 2NC/1NR to figure out where the 2NR will be going. The comments I made about speaking apply just as much for this speech as they do the 1ac. Overall good speech!

=6/30/2011=

Woooo Milky Luke! Your nickname should be Speedy Luke because you are FAST and clear (mostly – you got a little less clear as your speech went on, so I would focus on keeping up clarity when you do speed drills). Awesome. The one issue with your reading is that you are extremely monotone, which sometimes makes it hard to differentiate tags from cards (even though you have been slowing down on tags, which is good). You can do this by saying “and” between the bottom of each card and the start of the tag, which most judges take as a cue for a new card. Keep an eye on the timer – don’t start a new card a few seconds before your 1AC is about to run out, it makes you look unprepared. Great CX answers, you have a good presence during CX. Make sure to look at the judge, however.

Your CX of the 1NC was starting to be good, but needed a little more work. You did a good job by asking about Obama and the Air force, but you could have phrased your questions much more offensively. You asked, “If Obama doesn’t like space weapons, wouldn’t he cancel the Air Force weapons?”

Instead, you could have asked,

“If Obama doesn’t like space weapons, why would he allow asteroid defense to snowball into space weapons?”

“If the Air Force is building weapons now, why hasn’t the disad happened?”

OMG do not ask a question to Connor during his speech. Incredibly rude. Cardinal sin.

1AR: You have great answers to the case arguments and are an efficient speaker, but you are speaking too slowly. You get to the capitalism K with not enough time. You need to learn how to speak quickly even when you are speaking from a flow instead of reading. You also can extend less arguments on the weaponization flow because they dropped your intrinsicness argument, which takes out the whole DA. That saves you more time for capitalism.

= = =7/1/2011= 2N – Milky • Practice delivering your analytical arguments that are off the top of your head at full speed. It’s difficult to do at first, but once you practice it for a while it will become second nature and make your speeches much better and more efficient. • Focus on winning the impact to your arguments. You’re doing a good job winning comparative internal links, but always focus on explaining how it interacts with your impact argument. • Good job making comparative impact claims on the case debate. Locally mitigating the probability is a solid move, although you’re also going to have to make a comparative impact statement on the offcase flows to outweigh the case. • You need to provide warrants to some of your arguments. Why are asteroids limited, beyond the fact that you say they are? The affirmative argument that space is infinite isn’t great, but it’s certainly better than the basis. This argument begins to be recovered when you say they are mobile resources, but it still doesn’t provide a terrific argument. • The case debate is really good, but it’s very top heavy and very defensive. You are only saving 2 minutes for the cap debate, which is your crucial offensive argument. • Use an overview to extend all of your offense on the cap flow, and begin to set up your comparative impact arguments in the 2NC. If you don’t start that in the 2NC, the 2NR will require a lot more legwork. • Strong answers in cross-x, but again, focus on warrants. Use the cross-x to shore up the warrants in some of your more underdeveloped analytical arguments. • Good job making comparative impact claims in the 2NR overview. To improve your analysis, you need to isolate SPECIFIC differentials in the links and internal links, the magnitudinal claims, and the reasons why probability is much more effective. • Good use of inevitability arguments and impact in the status quo arguments to mitigate some of the issues with the systemic impact you’re reading. • Focus on identifying (a) why the alternative will solve the impact, and (b) why the perm is unable to solve the impacts of the K. You need to identify differentials in these arguments because they are the only real offensive arguments the 2AR can make.

-Talon

= 7/3/2011 =

Milkie Luke - Make sure to not change the tone and pitch of your voice when you’re reading the texts of the card – you sound a bit like an auctioneer right now. - Good job distinguishing tags and the plan text though you probably do not need to slow down as much as you are right now. Daiquann - Try not to get so heated in cross-x: it is not increasing the credibility of your line of questioning and hurts your ethos – it’s good to be aggressive but not belligerent.

Sienna - Great speaking voice. You sound good so work on building speed.

Daiquann - Try to help Sienna answer questions but don’t take over your partners cross-x. - Also, you should not plan to read the rest of a procedural in the 1NC, in the 2NC. If you really wanted it as part of your strat, you should make sure to time your partner’s speech so that you can direct her when to switch flows with enough time to complete the argument.

Lee - Great job on analytics. - Your blocks are well written, but try to build in more offense. - You can always read more case cards to answer 1NC arguments and 2AC add-ons when you have extra time but don’t have any more cards to read on offcase arguments.

DAIQUANN! MILKIE LUKE! BOOO! Stop taking over the cross-x’s!!! - Sienna you are doing fine asking questions, just ask more! Lee you also are doing fine answering questions so be more assertive.

Daiquann - Organization!!! Flowing seems to be going pretty well for you but you want to make sure you are ready and have everything you need when you stand up to speak. - You should subdivide your arguments into sections (i.e. “link debate”, “perm debate”, etc.). - Make sure to answer every argument and always be making specific K links to the aff (cards AND analytics). - More permutation answers!!! Danger zone!

Sienna - Good speech but I want to see more of your own ideas! It’s good to have blocks but it also is bad for your aesthetics when it appears you are only reading blocks. - Don’t be afraid to speak up for yourself over Daiquann!

Milkie Luke! - Good speech: work on focusing on offensive arguments. - Great job on the perms and intrinsicness argument on the disad. - The “counter-perm” is really a floating PICs argument and that’s why you should also always make this a theory argument in the 2NC.
 * You should make intrinsicness a theoretical argument.

Daiquann - Woahhhh! Devolution! Need organization!! Think strategy – what is the 2AR going to try to go for? What can lose you the debate? What can win you the debate? - You really need to take the permutations seriously! They’re high risk arguments. - The weakest part of a K is always the alt so make sure to explain how it will result in the aff impacts etc. - The threat construction arg. is good to eliminate the degree of the impacts.

Lee - You are planting in the right place but make sure to answer the rest of the 2NR. - Explain your aff advantages, weigh their impacts versus the K, and explain them as net benefits to your pick of permutation. - Answer the threat con argument and all of the case defense. - Go for your alternative answers too.