National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Bob Shurtz Paradigm
Lincoln Douglas
Lincoln Douglas Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with LD Debate (check all that apply)

Former LD coach
Experienced LD judge
Former Policy debater
Current Public Forum coach or judge

How many years have you judged LD debate?

38

How many LD rounds have you judged this year?

21-30

What is your preferred rate of delivery?

5/91 = Slow conversational style
9 = Rapid conversation speed
 

Does the rate of delivery weigh heavily in your decision?

N
 

Will you vote against a student solely for exceeding your preferred speed?

N

How important is the criterion in making your decision?

It may be a factor depending on its use in the round
 

Do you feel that a value and criterion are required elements of a case?

Y

Rebuttals and Crystallization

 

Voting issues should be given:

Either is acceptable
 

The use of jargon or technical language ("extend", "cross-apply", "turn", etc.) during rebuttals:

Is acceptable
 

Final rebuttals should include:

Both
 

Voting issues are:

Absolutely necessary

How do you decide the winner of the round?

I decide who is the winner of the key argument in the round

How necessary do you feel the use of evidence (both analytical and empirical) is in the round?

7/91 = Not necessary
9 = Always necessary

Please describe your personal note-taking during the round

I keep a rigorous flow
Additional remarks: I don't think the Value / Value Criterion should be voting issues in and of themselves. That is, proving that your V/VC is superior to your opponent's isn't a reason for me to vote for you unless you ALSO prove that your side of the resolution better achieves that V/VC than your opponent's side. You can win by (1) proving why you have the superior V/VC AND why your side better achieves that V/VC or (2) agreeing with your opponent's V/VC but showing that your side of the R better achieves your opponent's V/VC or (3) do an "even-if" analysis of (1) and (2). I am open to theory arguments on topicality and analysis of burdens, but no need to read a theory shell and the theory argument should show an actual substantial violation by your opponent and not a minor technicality or hypothetical violation. Generally I'd prefer that the debate be primarily centered on the actual resolution and the underlying value / value criterion.

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.

Judges

MAIN List Paradigms
Lincoln Douglas List & NSDA Paradigms
Policy List & NSDA Paradigms