National Speech and Debate Tournament

2024 — Des Moines, IA/US

Lori Crews Paradigm
Lincoln-Douglas
Lincoln Douglas Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with LD Debate (check all that apply)

Current LD coach
Experienced LD judge
Current Public Forum coach or judge
Speech coach

How many years have you judged LD debate?

18

How many LD rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

What is your preferred rate of delivery?

5/91 = Slow conversational style
9 = Rapid conversation speed
 

Does the rate of delivery weigh heavily in your decision?

N
 

Will you vote against a student solely for exceeding your preferred speed?

N

How important is the criterion in making your decision?

It may be a factor depending on its use in the round
 

Do you feel that a value and criterion are required elements of a case?

Y

Rebuttals and Crystallization

 

Voting issues should be given:

Either is acceptable
 

The use of jargon or technical language ("extend", "cross-apply", "turn", etc.) during rebuttals:

Is acceptable
 

Final rebuttals should include:

Voting issues
 

Voting issues are:

Absolutely necessary

How do you decide the winner of the round?

I decide who is the person who persuaded me more of their position

How necessary do you feel the use of evidence (both analytical and empirical) is in the round?

8/91 = Not necessary
9 = Always necessary

Please describe your personal note-taking during the round

I write down the key arguments throughout the round
Additional remarks: I will adopt the debaters' paradigms and hear just about any type of argument as long as analytics are given to explain. I won't intervene by providing my own links or analysis if debaters just read cards at me. Likewise, give me a framework and tell me how to weigh the round. In LD, I want this to be explicitly stated, even if it is a progressive framework. I'm fine with a non-traditional framework. Just explain it to me. In PF, the framework may or may not be explicitly stated, but I should be able to easily extrapolate a standard. It is imperative that debaters give voting issues and impact calculus linked back to the framework. If you don't, I'm stuck comparing argument to argument. I am fine with both progressive debate or traditional debate. A bit of speed is fine, but I would prefer that it not rise to the rates in CX. Also, keep in mind that more isn't necessarily better. Be strategic. Introduce what you think you can reasonably handle. I'm fine with debaters kicking out of arguments. Funnel arguments down to what is really important and viable in the round. Talk me through your position.

Note: if you wish for your pronouns to appear the debaters you judge on text/email blasts, log into Tabroom, click Profile at top, and add them in the Pronouns field.

Judges

MAIN List Paradigms
Lincoln-Douglas List & NSDA Paradigms
Policy List & NSDA Paradigms