I'm a newer judge for debate, however, I'm familiar with the structure and some jargon. I'm fine with speed as long as you enunciate and your opponent and I are can understand you. As a competitor, it's your burden to prove why I should vote for you as well as why you're more correct. That being said, explain fully what you're talking about (don't assume that I know what you're talking about). I prefer that opponents fully extend arguments and impacts because that is what I'll be voting on at the end of the day. Overall, be polite (such as not being rude during questioning or disruptive during speeches) and explain uniquely why you should win.

This is my first year of judging for Speech and Debate and my first time judging Lincoln Douglas. However, I have not debated myself, but I have been training with the Speech and Debate coach of the Huntington High School team. I will be looking for a clear value and value criterion which backs up the resolution, as well as solid contentions which reinforce the value and value criterion. Never assume that as a judge I know what you are talking about in your case so explain the details clearly. Speed is fine as long as I, the judge, can understand every word you say, however if your opponent is not ok with speed than do not go for it, especially in a traditional LD round.

You could call my debate paradigm rather traditional as I competed in high school and collegiate debate in the early 2000s and have coached for seventeen years since. I value persuasion in argumentation, but I also flow and focus on the issues that the competitors want me to focus on to reach my decision. I like creative and interesting arguments, so make them!

Also, I do my best not to intervene so if you want me to focus on something in a round, then you better tell me. I am not going to carry across/impact arguments for you or make up arguments that you did not make against your opponent's position, even if their advocacy carries significant weaknesses. I am also not going to ask for evidence without being called upon to do so (and if you want me to look at evidence at the end there had better be a good reason).

Rudeness will not be tolerated. You can be assertive, yet polite. If you ask a question in CX/crossfire, allow time for the opponent to answer and do not prematurely cut them off. I hated that as a competitor and I hate it still.

Make sure evidence is ready to hand to the other competitor or team when they call for it. If you do not have it, it will negatively impact speaker points AND I will not start running prep time for the other side until they have the card(s) they need. So you will be forfeiting free prep time to the other team if you are not organized.

Keep in mind that time limits provide a maximum, not a minimum. I would rather have you make a really efficient and clear rebuttal or summary or Final Focus that is a minute rather than have someone "fill time" with nebulous issues that do not matter.

Finally, is very important in the final speeches for debaters to write my ballot for me. Tell me what argument(s) you are winning and why they win you the round. Do some weighing of issues there too.