LD/PF: I am very much a lay judge. If you spread you will lose my ballot 100% of the time, as you are reducing access to the activity and overall making debate a less accessible activity

If you run a speed K and do it well and it is warranted I can almost guarantee you will get my ballot

Background & Experience

I hold degrees in Political Science and Communication Studies and currently serve as a debate coach. As a competitor, I achieved multiple state championships in Lincoln Douglas Debate, Extemporaneous Speaking, and Original Oratory. I was also a two-time national competitor in United States Extemporaneous Speaking. This background informs my approach to judging - I value both the technical and communicative aspects of debate, drawing from my competitive success and academic training in political theory and rhetoric.

Lincoln Douglas and Public Forum Paradigm General Expectations

• Speaking Style: I expect clear, well-paced delivery. Spreading is not appropriate in my rounds. Strong speaking skills and rhetorical ability matter significantly in my evaluation.
• Decorum: Debaters should:
  • Stand for speeches and cross examination
  • Direct all arguments to the judge (not to opponents)
  • Maintain professional demeanor throughout the round
  • Show respect to opponents and the competitive format

Technical Preferences Flowing & Speed

• I flow all rounds thoroughly and can follow quick-paced argumentation
• However, clarity should never be sacrificed for speed
• All arguments should be comprehensible to an educated lay audience

Framework & Value Structure (LD)

• I place significant emphasis on framework level debate
• Strong philosophical and moral warrants are essential, especially on resolutions containing "ought" claims
• Value/Criterion structures should be clearly articulated and consistently applied
• Framework debates should go beyond mere definitions to engage with substantive philosophical questions

Argumentation

• I evaluate arguments based on:
  • Logical validity
  • Quality of evidence/warrants
  • Strategic weight within the round
  • Clear impact analysis
• Dropped arguments matter but don't automatically result in a loss
• Technical concession does not override glaring logical flaws

Cross Examination

• Cross examination should be used to expose flaws in opponent's arguments, not merely to set up future responses
• Questions should be direct and purposeful
• CX contributes to speaker points through quality of answers and strategic questioning

Speaker Points

Speaker points in my rounds reflect:

• Strategic choices in argumentation
• Speaking ability and rhetorical skills
• Professional conduct
• Effective time management
• Quality of responses in cross examination

Summary:

• I vote for the debater who best combines technical proficiency with effective communication
• Both form and substance matter in my evaluation
• I reward debaters who can make complex arguments accessible while maintaining competitive rigor
• Clear impact analysis and weighing in the final focus/rebuttal is essential

Extemporaneous Speaking Judging Paradigm Philosophy

I view extemporaneous speaking as a unique fusion of debate analysis and improvisational performance, where speakers must demonstrate both intellectual depth and polished delivery. Drawing from my background as a national competitor and coach, I expect speeches that combine thorough analysis with engaging presentation.

Content Expectations

• Analysis
  • Demonstrate clear understanding of current events and their historical context
  • Provide accurate, factual analysis that withstands scrutiny
  • Support claims with current, credible sources
  • Avoid oversimplification of complex issues
  • Connect historical precedents appropriately to modern situations

Structural Elements

• Organization
  • Clear and consistent signposting
  • Physical movement should align with main points
  • Logical progression of ideas
  • Well-developed sub-points that support the central answer
  • Compelling introduction and conclusion that frame the analysis

Delivery

• Speaking Style
  • Fluid, conversational tone
  • Natural and confident presence
  • Professional yet engaging delivery
  • Effective use of gestures and movement
  • Clear articulation and appropriate pace

Source Usage

• Citations
  • Recent, relevant sources
  • Variety of credible publications
  • Strategic integration of evidence
  • Sources should enhance rather than overwhelm analysis

Overall Assessment

I evaluate speakers on their ability to:

• Provide a clear, direct answer to the question
• Support that answer with sophisticated analysis
• Present their speech with polish and confidence
• Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge of current events
• Navigate complex political and social issues with nuance