National Speech and Debate Tournament
2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US
Daniel Ciocca Paradigm
Lincoln Douglas
Lincoln Douglas Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with LD Debate (check all that apply)
Current LD coachHow many years have you judged LD debate?
7How many LD rounds have you judged this year?
41+What is your preferred rate of delivery?
7/91 = Slow conversational style9 = Rapid conversation speed
Does the rate of delivery weigh heavily in your decision?
NWill you vote against a student solely for exceeding your preferred speed?
NHow important is the criterion in making your decision?
It is a major factor in my evaluationDo you feel that a value and criterion are required elements of a case?
YRebuttals and Crystallization
Voting issues should be given:
Either is acceptableThe use of jargon or technical language ("extend", "cross-apply", "turn", etc.) during rebuttals:
Is acceptableFinal rebuttals should include:
BothVoting issues are:
Absolutely necessaryHow do you decide the winner of the round?
I decide who is the person who persuaded me more of their positionHow necessary do you feel the use of evidence (both analytical and empirical) is in the round?
7/91 = Not necessary9 = Always necessary
Please describe your personal note-taking during the round
I keep a rigorous flowI don't mind listening to a unique or interesting argument but somehow you MUST link it back to the resolution if you are going to get my ballot.
Plans: All good, just make it relatable to the topic
Counter-plans: All good.
Theory: If there is significant violation or abuse in a round that warrants running theory, I will vote on it but generally not a fan of debating about debate.
Ks: Willing to listen to a good K as long there is a really strong and convincing link back. Not a fan of generic links or links of omission as an excuse to run the K you want to run.
DA: I'm fine with them, we are all good here
T: I think aff has an obligation to be somewhat topical and neg has the right to question whether aff is in fact being topical. That being said, while I generally will not vote on a straight RVI, running T for the sole purpose of creating a time suck for aff and then kicking it in the NR is not a strat that is going to sit well with me.
Conditional Arguments: Anything more than 2 conditional arguments is abusive and puts aff in an impossible situation in the 1AR. I will vote off “Condo bad” in these situations.
Disclosure: Seems like it gets run a lot for no purpose other than trying to get a cheap win. However, If the affirmative is reading a case that is so unique, such as a specific plan text, that the negative would have difficulty engaging with then disclosure is the fair thing to do.
Note: if you wish for your pronouns to appear the debaters you judge on text/email blasts, log into Tabroom, click Profile at top, and add them in the Pronouns field.