Rashidi,+Emaan

I am a recent highschool graduate with 3 years of Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum experience. I feel that like any judge, I want to see a good round. One that I could be able to tell didn't have a plethora of nonsense stats inserted at a last second, rather lots of interesting, unique arguments. I was trained in a traditional Lincoln Douglas setting, meaning no spreading, counterplans, theory, etc, however I so have insight into the progressive world through my personal past rounds. I do not mind if you run unique arguments, but I prefer you be fair to your opponent, meaning: do not spread, knowing that they do not, or do not run 3 offs and an on case when you know they aren't trained in that respect. For LD: I love a really good philosophy framework debate, one that actually links to your contentions. I think it is really hard to achieve a good framework debate because of misunderstood philosophical pillars. I am not a fan of theory either, unless there is a serious violation and in that case, I'd probably be able to see the abuse. For Public Forum: I HATE endless spitting of Stats, and arguments based off dates or trivial things. Spend time explaining the importance of your evidence towards your position on the topic.