Johnson,+Andy

toc =6/28/2011= 1A: It seems like you have a pretty good grasp of the 1AC evidence, so try to sound a little more confident in your CX answers. If you don’t know the answer to a specific question, give it your best shot and then redirect to a part of the aff you are able to talk about. You do a good job extending evidence in the 1ar. I think you could also work on sounding a little more forceful here, especially when you talk about your devastating impacts.

=6/30/2011= 1A-You're very bright, and your verbal delivery is great. You did an amazing job in the 1 AR of pointing out contradictions in the neg's approach/strategy. I have two things for you to think about. The first is to be confident. Go for the kill-be aggressive. You must convey to your opponents and audience that you are in charge. The second thing is to weigh your arguments for your judge. You did a good job of pointing out the inconsistencies and contradictions in the neg's arguments. Weigh them for your judge so your judge knows you win in any scenario. If you let me think, you might not like my decision. Write the judges ballot by showing how you outweigh in each situation of the contradiction. Good job and thanks.

=7/5/2011=

Good reading of the 1ac–you have gotten faster and clearer since I judged you last time. You seem to know the 1ac really well in CX. Always put case on top in the 1ar–it provides a good framing for your speech and means you wont drop it (which is pretty much an auto loss). Even though it is sometimes funny and easier to you, I suggest you don’t use “informal language”–describing exopolitics as “sweet” and “cool” doesn’t make them sound very important or serious. You do a really good job explaining your turns on the politics DA. I think you want to reframe your case argument–it is not that the aliens “do stuff for us” but that there is a benefit inherent to searching for life in others. Good distinction between development and SETI in terms of DA links.

=7/6/2011=

You started with such a good 2nc—extending arguments and talking through your positions. Don’t let 1 card not being read mess with your mind—just keep going after you read that one. Also, think about other cards Saunder read in the 1nc that might be helpful in disproving their point. “cap is the most evil thing ever”—is there a way to rephrase this to make it into an comparative argument about your alternative and the affirmative? Good use of your qualifications arguments, but how should the judge evaluate those arguments—should I reject the team or just those particular arguments? Good job kicking out of the DA, but be sure to make it go away, you just say extend no impact, but you need to make an argument about why that means they cant access any offense from it. Good job with theory args in the 2nr—no new args, especially perms.

=7/10/2011=

--you are making smart arguments in the 1ar, but you can make them a lot more efficiently, don’t make gaps or repeat yourself in the middle, it will allow you to get in more smart per second --you have a good rhythm that you get into, but In order to keep it you physically sway dramatically from side to side, slow that down or minimize it—It willmake u faster, easier to follow and focus your energy and ur debating --phrase everything you say in the 1ar as “extend the 2ac” --rather than “we have cards that say”—you should say –extend my Johnson evidence, indicates that --make your arguments with the confidence that I think you actually have in them