Hello to all!

Background:

My name is Emily Bell and this is my second year with Speech and Debate. My main event is Congress (in which I made it to finals for state), but I also have quite a bit of experience with Lincoln Douglas Debate. I dabbled with prose, pro-con challenge, and debated World Schools at nationals. I have also been a part of Mock Trial for fours years.

Paradigms:

I always allow a fifteen-second grace period, after which I will verbally cut you off. Please time yourselves as well, it is great practice for varsity season.

LD: I will score based on strong your case upholds your value and love seeing value clash. One of my favorite parts of the debate is the questioning period. While I do not flow questions, I will take what is brought up into consideration and see how it plays out during the rest of the round. The final rebuttal is a HUGE part of the debate for me. Also, this is a debate about morality, so while I encourage you to have cards and evidence, having strong framework and impacts will win this debate for me.

Some general things that I will not tolerate in a round: character attacks, swearing, being disrespectful to your opponents, and discriminatory language.

Have fun and let's see a good debate y'all!

Hey y’all! If you’re reading this, it is probably because I am judging you. That being said, here is a little bit about me: I did speech and debate in high school and primarily competed in LD, congress, and extemp. I’ve competed in multiple states and on the nat circuit. I love debate, and I am excited to watch y’all!

Things to keep in mind:

- Off-time roadmaps are fine and appreciated.

- I will flow speeches and important parts of cx, but I won’t make the arguments for you.

- Tell me how to vote!

- Speed is fine, I was a fast debater. However, do not spread- If I can’t understand what you’re saying/need to read along to understand, I will not flow it.

- I will time, but I expect you to time yourselves as well. If you go 10+ seconds over your allotted time; I will cut you off.

- Make good arguments. Don’t just tell me something without backing it up/explaining it. Claim, warrant, impact!

- You can ask for evidence, and I will not include it in prep unless it feels excessive.

- Be respectful!

- LD specific- V/VC are important, carry them through the debate.

- Congress specific- Congress is a debate, so debate. Bring up other speakers, disprove/expand on their points, etc. Use evidence in congress speeches.

Live, Laugh, Love!

Biography

I have a MA in literature from the University of Colorado, Boulder, and am familiar with many of the writers cited in K's. It excites me to see young people still utilize this philosophy; however, it does not excite me when people might run a K and then also run a counterplan that the K would also critique. I am all for theory, but be genuine about it. Fred Moten wrote in The University and the Undercommons, "The prophet is the one who tells the brutal truth, who has the capacity to see the absolute brutality of the already-existing and to point it out and to tell that truth, but also to see the other way, to see what it could be." A K is that willingness to speak the brutal truth and then invest in the alternative of what it could be. A K is not to speak the brutal truth and then turn around and propose a counterplan that only perpetuates the systemic violence inherent in a brutal truth

Lincoln-Douglas.

I value debate as a speaking and listening event and also as an education event. After all, the original Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas debates were a platform for two senate candidates to meaningfully introduce themselves to voters during the 1858 senate election in Illinois. Also as a consolation to anyone who really tries their hardest in round but winds up losing: Lincoln also lost that senate election. Debate isn't just about winning and losing. Speech and debate is about growing your confidence to prepare you for an even bigger thing in your life.

I hope you as debaters also value communication and thoughtfulness in your own presentation during round by doing your best to meet the following standards:

1. Talking clearly and deliberately. I understand urgency, but you can still be urgent and intelligible.
2. Being mindful of your language. I understand a lot of debate lingo has made our community increasingly esoteric. Words such as "cross apply," "inherency," "exploding grounds for debate," etc. don't mean much of anything to the outside community. They certainly wouldn't have won neither Douglas nor Lincoln any votes. Please do not throw your case or rebuttals full of a lot of jargon. Don't just say "cross apply my Jackson '24 card to their contention 1" when doing a rebuttal. I flow and take notes, but I am not making sure I copy down authors; instead, I'm doing my best to follow your argument.
3. Being mindful of your language (part 2). Please don't use a phrase like "my opponent is being abusive." Abuse is a very specific physical, emotional, and psychological horror. Just say your opponent is being unfair.
4. Doing the work for the audience. Give me clear voter issues that crystallize the round and properly weigh what has been said. I'm still flowing though, so be mindful that you don't strawman or misrepresent your fellow debater's positions! I really dislike it when a debater says another debater "dropped their whole contention 1" when in fact they probably did address it.
5. Respecting the audience and the conventions of the debate. For Colorado debaters, this means no grace period for speeches! Secondly, during cross if someone asks a question at 2:45 or so, that other person can respond, but please keep the response concise.
6. Respecting the audience and the conventions of the debate (part 2). I do not participate in email chains or case sharing. My role as a judge is to listen to each debater communicate their case verbally to an audience including myself. Speech and debate is a speaking event. It's not like the US Court of Appeals where over 90% of cases from the appellate are decided by just three judges reviewing written cases.
7. Respecting the audience and the conventions of the debate (part 3). If you suspect dishonest behavior like misrepresented or powertagged evidence, slow it down and make the case. Don't rely on debate jargon like "the internals of the card does not support their warrant." Break it down for me and spell it out. Also, tell me you want me to pull this card. I don't intervene as a judge unless I am explicitly asked to.

Public Forum Debate (formerly known as Ted Turner Debate)

The original category for PF debate suggests its interest in being arguably the most accessible form of debate. Named after media mogul Ted Turner, PF should give the audience an approachable view of the topic that is ultimately educational. Imagine you are on some distinguished network like PBS and you represent the very best of advocates for your position--like David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart for example (on PBS). All seven of my interests from LD apply to PF.