University of Florida
Bachelor's Degree in chemistry, PhD in analytical chemistry, MBA, DMD
I have never participted in debate, however I do have judging experience from the Sunvitational and New York City invitational. I am a tabla rasa judge to this topic, meaning I have not researched the topic or have any preconceived beliefs about it. I will consider each round a blank slate, so all information must be provided by the teams. While I understand some debate jargon, please consider me a lay judge for all intents and purposes.
Treat this round like I am the jury of a trial. I am an educated citizen of the United States with no prior knowledge on the topic. All arguments must be strengthened by evidence, logic, or both.
Speed is an important factor in my decision. On a scale from 1 (conversational speed) to 10 (speed reading) I am comfortable at a 3, but will disregard anything above a 5.
Weighting and Preferences:
I will weigh persuasion extremely heavily. I will be taking minimal notes during the round, so I will appreciate clear, articulate, and concise arguments and evidence. I believe skilled debaters can communicate their ideas effectively with as few words as possible. If one can persuade me to vote for their side, I will. This is why it is crucial that the debater outlines why I should vote to their side during their final focus speech.
Evidence is crucial towards any claim, unless it is a logical conclusion that is reasonable to understand. I weigh evidence based and logic based arguments equally. Impacting arguments is important, so make sure I understand why each argument is relevant to the round.
Please do not waste my time on counter plan accusations. Unless an argument is EXTREMELY obvious in demonstrating a plan of action, I will ignore the accusation.
Please note that since I am acting as a jury, I will accept any argument as long as it sounds logical. It is up to the other team to disprove a claim or explain why it should not be counted. It is not my job to analyze each piece of evidence. I do not like it when teams are picky about evidence. Source comparison is okay as long as both teams are being reasonable.
Please read all acronyms fully at least once, or I will start to think about what they mean and miss your argument.
I will give points to teams who sound educated and well researched on the topic. I ask teams to only read their first speeches from paper, and not read directly for other speeches. Debaters should be able to explain rebuttals and strengthen their arguments in their own words. This will persuade me more and will be weighed in my reason for decision.
I do not have any seating preferences and I will not be keeping time.
If you have any questions or concerns about my preferences, please ask me before the round with the other team present. I will give light feedback after each round upon request but will not disclose my reason for decision until after the tournament. Good luck to all debaters!