Hi! I'm looking forward to judging this tournament! I have a lot of experience as an LD debater in high school and a decent amount of experience judging several debate events. I think that NSDA Nationals should be preserved as a competitive national tournament for traditional LD debaters. This means that I don't want to hear spreading, kritiks, theory, etc. The exception to this is if both you and your opponent are experienced with these things and want to make it a circuit round, but I still won't be super excited about it. In terms of how I evaluate traditional LD, I don't place a lot of weight on framework. I wouldn't spend a lot of time on it in your speeches unless you're good at it, it's important for you to win in order to support your contention level arguments, or there's an actual conflict between you and your opponent's frameworks (like deontology vs. utilitarianism). Make sure your arguments are warranted and extend them throughout the round. I want there to be evidence to back up your assertions and I prefer carded evidence over paraphrased. At the end of the round, tell me which of your impacts still stand, which of your opponent's impacts stand (or don't), and why your impacts are more important than your opponent's. Have fun and good luck!