I judge debaters in two main areas: rhetoric and role-play.

Rhetoric- I love to see pathos, logos, and ethos evident in speeches. I especially value a good hook to introduce the speech to the chamber that is well thought out, dripping in pathos, and leaves me wanting to hear more. A debater should utilize logos and have reliable evidence to back up claims of impact and harm. The speech's conclusion should recap and utilize ethos suggesting to the chamber why they should be persuaded to vote with their side on the legislation. Any speeches beyond the first Aff and Neg should refer to previous speeches and arguments for the highest score.

Role-play- Each debater should conduct themselves the same way a real member of Congress would act. This includes language, vocabulary, parliamentary procedure, and referring to other chamber members as Congressmen. I would also include, that they should refer to other Congressman's arguments and mention that person by name as they debate and refute opinions contrary to their own.

I am a former debater and I've been coaching debate for 6 years. I'm a more traditional judge, in that I generally dislike super progressive arguements. I would describe myself as a flow judge at heart, though and I am always careful to make sure that the round is fair and my decision is unbiased.

I have been judging all forms of Speech and Debate for 5 years. I competed in Congress during my time as a competitor

I prefer to have a structured debate that has a progressive flow on both sides of the argument. Aggressive debate is fine but competitors should remain cordial to each other throughout the debate. All debate is point structured, so the win or loss is allocated to the competitor who both makes the better point and defends best against their opponent.

Organization is key for me as a judge. Your debate needs to follow a logical order with cohesiveness, if I can't understand the argument than I will have a much harder time judging it.

The most important aspects of a debate in terms of wins and losses is an evidence based approach that addresses all arguments in a manner of completeness. Leaving an opening within the debate is a sign of lack of preparation and will be judged accordingly. I expect all competitors to be aware of NSDA rules and regulations within their debating structure.