Lampert,+Iain

 **DEBATE BACKGROUND: **
 * I competed in parliamentary debate for two years at Cleveland HS (5th @ CHSSA State Championship, 2010). I competed in Impromptu (1st @ CHSSA State Championship, 2010) as well, but that doesn't matter to my debate paradigm aside from influencing my love for wordplay and Whose Line Is It Anyway-style humor.
 * I also competed in collegiate mock trial for four years at UCLA, where I was on two National Championship teams.
 * I've coached at James Logan High School, La Reina High School, Dougherty Valley High School, Nova 42 Academy, 3P Speech LLC, Emerson Middle School, and the Stanford National Forensic Institute. I've founded programs at CHAMPS Charter, Los Angeles CES, Valley International Prep-South, and iLEAD North Hollywood.
 * I've taught United States History, Theater, and Speech & Debate. I serve as the 2015-2016 West Los Angeles District Chair for the National Speech and Debate Association.

**DEBATE PHILOSOPHY: **
 * Debate is a game. Mastery requires an understanding of strategy, logical argumentation, and memorable rhetoric.
 * Winning according to the rules of the round is impressive, but creating a lasting impression with neat turns of phrase and passionate delivery--the sort of credible presentation that would be accepted in other public speaking forums--is exceptional. I love to see it in round.

**CRITERIA FOR JUDGING: **
 * I don't love debate jargon, since I've seen it become a lazy fallback for too many debaters. At worst, new competitors are shut out of the community because they're not up-to-date on the latest edition of the LD-ictionary. I can't stand that. If a newer debater asks you for definitions, please explain it to them in simple, accessible language. If you're using a particularly arcane term--something you didn't even know about until your second or third year as a competitor--make sure you tell me what you mean so I don't misconstrue anything.
 * Ks are Kool, but I really need to see that you care about the value of debate as an activity, and feel strongly about the deleterious impacts of your opponent's verbal misconduct. Show me passion! Show me indignance! Show me how they're spitting in the face of this wonderful activity! A deadpan, uncaring K is the worst, and it's difficult to vote on--if it doesn't sound like you really care, why should I? The same goes for T. Once you're running debate theory in the round, I no longer evaluate it as a "blank slate"--I consider my own views on what's most educational for debate, because I can't divorce arguments about what's best for debate, and the impact my decision might have, from my own beliefs and experiences.
 * Turns are great. Love 'em.
 * I don't want to hear rehash in the rebuttal. Take a step back and write my ballot for me with three to five voting issues. Give me a clear road-map with their taglines.
 * Call your opponents out on logical fallacies. This is the easiest way to get me to disregard one of their contentions.
 * I want to see how all of your arguments are directly related to your proposed value. Make it SUPER obvious to me. If you don't do that, I won't weigh 'em. If you can show me how your arguments also tie into your opponent's proposed value, so much the better.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">If you ask me direct questions during the round ("does that make sense?"), I may non-verbally respond (by shaking my head, for example).
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">I don't like fast debate AT ALL. Word economy is hugely important to clarity, and even top-tier debaters often spew out countless filler words to maintain fluency. You don't need to do this! Using less words to leave the same impression and communicate the same content is ALWAYS preferable. I'm hugely receptive to speed Ks.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">You REALLY need to slow down for card author names. That said, just because Professor Morris from Stanford has X opinion about Y value doesn't automatically make it true; the only reason citations here are important is because avoiding plagiarism is good. Statistical citations, assuming you can explain to me how they arrived at those numbers, are far more credible and meaningful when it comes to earning my ballot.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">I won't yell CLEAR. I'll just stop typing.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">If I'm not typing, it's because I can't understand you, I don't know where I'm supposed to be flowing, and/or you're just repeating yourself.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">Assume I know nothing about the topic at all. Explain what's going on to me. I'll only intervene if something is glaringly, blatantly incorrect.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">I think watching cross-ex is the best part of judging debate. If you don't cut each other off repeatedly, that's a plus. If you demonstrate courtroom-esque "witness control" and legally proper questions (a nice combination of leading and open-ended questions; nothing compound or overly long), I'll shower you in speaker points and praise.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">Tell me where I should be flowing. "We're on the affirmative's second contention, first subpoint. Now, let's move to their second contention, second subpoint." I never want to hear "and also" when I could be hearing "Go down to their third contention, first supboint."
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">Don't tell me to cross-reference different points. Do your own work and tell me how the arguments interact.
 * <span style="font-family: inherit; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-size: inherit; vertical-align: middle; vertical-align: middle;">I believe in the "affirmative burden of proof." The AFF gets the privilege of having the last word, so they had better prove the resolution true by the end of the round. If debaters argue to a draw, then I tend to "default NEG."

**Best of luck!**