Do not use Policy speed or jargon.

In LD: you must demonstrate why you win the value clash.

I almost exclusively judge Varsity LD and have done so for a few years.  I am looking for a debate with a clear value clash and a logical framework.  Feel free to run theory.  I can keep up with a fast flow, but don't let speed impede your meaning or clarity.  I enjoy a good cross-x.  Play nice and have fun.

Public Forum:

- I expect a true debate, without the technical structures of LD and Policy debate

- I vote for the side which argued the most-convincing arguments

- I believe evidence should be presented and utilized, but not argued over or leaned upon.

- I believe crossfires should have discussion. They are not cross-examinations.

- I expect professionalism and courtesy. You can't argue against your opponent if you don't understand them.

Lincoln Douglas:

I am relatively inexperienced juding an LD debate. If you want me to understand your flow, please be sure to walk through it diligently and with patience. You have a long time for a construct, so use it. However, I do appreciate when a debate consistently and appropriately ties arguments to the value and criterion, as that helps me understand the impacts of the arguments.