I do not like spreading, especially online as I have a hard time understanding what you are saying if you spread. Also, please try not to mumble as I am somewhat hard of hearing.

I do not like Ks. I do not know how to judge a competitor using one or any kind of progressive debate in LD.

I use she/her pronouns.

I have coached all forms of debate, with students as state champions, national qualifiers, and national outrounds (mainly in LD, but also CX, PFD, and congress). While I am a coach of 20+ years, I like to be treated as a lay judge. My philosophy is that regardless of the style of debate, you should never assume that your judge knows more than you and it is your responsibility to educate them on the topic. That means:

1) I prefer speech habits that emphasize persuasiveness and understanding. Don't spread, make sure to signpost, and think about how you can use your voice to emphasize key points.

2) Avoid topic-specific jargon. We are not researching this stuff to the level that you do as a competitor. Don't throw out an acronym without telling me what it stands for, unless it is a universally-known one (i.e. NATO). Sometimes even terms of art in the resolution aren't really known to the judge, so it is helpful to clarify. That also goes for complex ideas and theories.

3) Explain your arguments/contentions. Just reading card after card does not showcase your logic. Remember the warrant -- WHY does that evidence matter? And with that said, what is the impact? I love a good impact.

You could call my debate paradigm rather traditional as I competed in high school and collegiate debate in the early 2000s and have coached for seventeen years since. I value persuasion in argumentation, but I also flow and focus on the issues that the competitors want me to focus on to reach my decision. I like creative and interesting arguments, so make them!

Also, I do my best not to intervene so if you want me to focus on something in a round, then you better tell me. I am not going to carry across/impact arguments for you or make up arguments that you did not make against your opponent's position, even if their advocacy carries significant weaknesses. I am also not going to ask for evidence without being called upon to do so (and if you want me to look at evidence at the end there had better be a good reason).

Rudeness will not be tolerated. You can be assertive, yet polite. If you ask a question in CX/crossfire, allow time for the opponent to answer and do not prematurely cut them off. I hated that as a competitor and I hate it still.

Make sure evidence is ready to hand to the other competitor or team when they call for it. If you do not have it, it will negatively impact speaker points AND I will not start running prep time for the other side until they have the card(s) they need. So you will be forfeiting free prep time to the other team if you are not organized.

Keep in mind that time limits provide a maximum, not a minimum. I would rather have you make a really efficient and clear rebuttal or summary or Final Focus that is a minute rather than have someone "fill time" with nebulous issues that do not matter.

Finally, is very important in the final speeches for debaters to write my ballot for me. Tell me what argument(s) you are winning and why they win you the round. Do some weighing of issues there too.