Last changed on
Tue January 17, 2023 at 3:51 AM CDT
The biggest request that I have for anyone who is debating while I am judging is to please not spread. We are in a forensics competition and I am here to evaluate your arguments and how well you present those arguments. Spitting out 30 poorly constructed arguments in a speech is not as effective on my ballot as putting forward 5 or 6 arguments that are well constructed and well presented.
When it comes to my decision-making process in debate, I am a pure stock issue judge. The Affirmative has the burden to prove that there is a significant problem and that you are presenting a solution that fixes that problem without creating major repercussions. If there was no debate to happen, and I had to vote for a side I would automatically vote negative because the Affirmative has the burden to win me over.
For refutation, walk me through the refutation steps so that I can have a clean flow. I need to be told what you are responding to, the tagline of what your response is, and then an impact of why your refutation and arguments trump their argument. I will not draw those lines for you. A refutation with no link to what argument it responds to is just a floating argument on my flow until you link it. This can hurt you when I cast my ballot if you are not linking refutation, so it is crucial to follow the four-step refutation process for every argument you respond to.
Finally, I love and enjoy lively debates. I want arguments to get heated and contested and follow all the way through the round. However, do not cross the line between lively argumentation and bashing your opponent. No one is here to attack anyone but rather to attack the arguments. If your opponent makes an argument that seems problematic, call out the argument but do not attack the person.
