Last changed on
Sat February 24, 2024 at 2:02 AM CDT
I am a judge that listens to all arguments and if you explain them well enough and correctly, I'm willing to vote on any argument. One thing that will get you the 3 or 4 in my round is disrespect. Debating is educational and there's no reason to be rude or disrespectful to your opponents or the judge. I love debaters that use all the time they have to thoroughly explain arguments.
T - I only vote on logical arguments. If you hit the opponent with a t over "the" or "its" I'm probably not going to vote for you. I only vote on T if the neg argues it correctly. Hit all points, go through every part of T and explain why you win on all points.
DAs - I'm always willing to vote for a DA as long as all parts of the DA are standing by the end of the round, if you drop a part of your DA, and the AFF sufficiently answers it, I will stop flowing the DA.
CPs - I'm willing to hear and vote for any CPs as long as they solve what the aff claims to. My biggest pet peeve with counterplans is a neg that won't answer a perm. If you're permed and don't convince me why only your plan solves, I'm flowing the CP affirmative.
Ks - I love Kritiks and believe when done right they're amazing, however, kritiks are my least favorite argument just because they're hard to run correctly. Don't assume I understand what your kritik is saying just by you reading the cards. Kritiks are very complex arguments that benefit from more explanation.
Theory - I love a little theory here and there, but as a debater myself, I prefer hearing arguments regarding why the case itself won't work, not how the other team breaks the rules of debate. I will vote on theory, but I try not to.
