Ehalt,+Kelsie

The George Washington University, 2015-2019 Timber Creek High School, 2011-2015

I wrote this with LD in mind, but I tend to judge PF with a similar mindset. If you have any questions, please ask before the round!

__**Background**__
I'm currently a freshman at GW and have debated locally and nationally for 3 years. I did LD during my sophomore and junior years and switched to PF senior year. I have judged primarily novice PF, with some LD as well.

__**General**__
I consider myself a traditional LD judge. I can handle some speed, but detest spreading. I'm not a fan of K's, disads, theory etc. If you want to do these things, you can try to run a more lay permutation of them, but just make sure that they are resolutional and that you are explaining your ideas adequately as I am not familiar with very much circuit lit. I do however, really like a good plan or CP. When making a decision, I am pretty holistic, I try not to vote off of one extension. Please __weigh__ your arguments; I will not do it for you! I will disclose if the tournament will allow it.

__**Speed**__
I can flow pretty quickly, but certainly not high-speed spreading. Debate is a communication activity. Speaking at 300+ words per minute is not communication.

As a general rule: You should, at no point during the round, hyperventilate...



If I look like this or drop my pen, slow down!



__**Roadmapping**__
Please do it, it makes my life easier. I strongly prefer just going from top to bottom of the flow, but if you need to do something else, let me know. Be reasonable, I don't want to hear a roadmap of, "AC, 2 K's, 5 DA's, and then a Plan."

**__K's, Disads, Theory, etc__**
I am not well read in circuit lit. If you just read an author's last name, don't expect me to know the person's ideas, what books they wrote, where they are from, their favorite flavor of ice cream, etc. You need not be extreme about this, I know the basic guys pretty well (Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Rawls especially) but just know that I'm not as familiar with Zizek, Lacan, and any others who are commonly run on the national circuit. I'll be happy (and may reward you with speaks) if you quote Hitchens or Chomsky, they are favorite authors of mine.

When it comes to progressive stuff, I'm not a huge fan, but I can tolerate some of it as long as it is explained, linked, warranted, and impacted clearly.

Topicality and links are really important to me. The resolution is there for a reason; don't run a Imperialism K if it only has a tenuous link to the resolution.

I'm ok with disads as long as the link is clear and that you are reasonable with them.

I will not vote for performance affs. This is debate, so please debate.

Please don't run theory unless there is serious abuse. I will evaluate it if there was a real violation, but if it's just run for the sake of running theory, I won't be voting off of it. If you are running something out of the norm or esoteric (it might be the norm, but again I'm not so familiar with circuit lit), explain it sufficiently and I'll be ok, but please avoid too much jargon.

I give away what I'm thinking with my face; if I look something like this, I have no idea what you are saying...



Explain what you are talking about, or change your strategy!

__**Plans and CP's**__
I'm a PFer; I like empirics and real-world application. Therefore, I like plan's and CP's, if they are run well. You need to provide a clear, warranted, and feasible alternative to the resolution.

__**CX**__
I don't usually flow cross, this is your time to figure out your angle of attack. If something really important comes up, talk about it in a subsequent speech.

__**Weighing**__
It is your job to weigh, not mine. Clearly label clashes (there should only be 2-3, not 21 of them) and tell me why you win each one and we will be good. I really like the use of "aff world vs neg world" structure.

**__Speaks__**
My biggest pet-peeve in round is rudeness. I will severely dock speaks if you are rude at any time during the round. Varsities, if you are hitting less experienced teams, be nice. You don't have to coddle them, but don't just crush them because you can. You are here to learn and have fun, calm down and enjoy yourself.

Also, please don't yell at me during your speeches, I can hear just fine, thanks.

I'd rather not feel like this when you start to speak.



I realize that I tend to give low speaks (I usually default to 27 for pretty generic round, more if you are really good), but to give you ample opportunity for more speaks, I will give 30 speaks if you...

> Do any of these things in a way that makes sense (don't just throw them in for the heck of it) and you'll get points from me.
 * Reference to House of Cards (a solid reference, more than just mentioning the Underwoods)
 * Use the Merriam Webster "Word of the Day" correctly (pronunciation and all)
 * Quote Christopher Hitchens

__**After the Round**__
I will disclose, if tab will let me. I will also answer any questions you have about my decision, debate in general, college, or anything, but please, do not argue with me. I have won rounds because my opponent argued with my judge about their decision, and while I wouldn't base my decision on this, I will seriously tank your speaks.

Have fun! Debate is the greatest activity you can do in high school, enjoy your time doing it!

Thanks for reading, and...