Bellus,+Paul

LD Judge Philosophy:

Frequently asked questions by LDrs: (1) Is speed ok?--Yes. I coach NDT policy teams so you can go fast. But, it is important to note that dropped arguments do not necessarily mean you win a debate. First, arguments interact on the flow and if your opponent's arguments directly implicate the "truth" of what you think is a dropped argument you may lose--please explain the drops in relation to the clash in the debate. Second, a number and 3 words do not make an argument. Don't equate speed with shoddy refutation and argumentation. Please error on the side of too much information than less information when describing your claims in relation to their warrants and implications. Besides, that will get you MONSTER POINTS! I enjoy rhetorical visions created with passion and a sense of reality. If I can imagine your argument that increases the possibility I will vote for it. (2) What is your paradigm?--Depends. I sometimes think this is asking if I strictly adhere to the Value/Criterion debate which has defined LD for the last decade and a half. This answer is no. I think there are multiple strategies both the affirmative and negative can deploy to win rounds. Policyesque arguments, critical arguments, alternative frameworks from which to evaluate the debate are to mention just a few broad areas. The key is win why your form/style of debate is "more desirable" than your opponent's alternative--however that gets defined--if challenged. In fact, I think you can critique the notion of Value/Criterion debate as well as criticize any form of argumentation. I do not think the negative necessarily needs an alternative to their critique. It depends on the critique.

How to gain MONSTER POINTS (increasing your chance to break)? Speed is fine--comprehensible speed is desirable. If I can't understand you I will say so during the speech--"Clearer!" Do not let this rattle you. It is for your sake that I mention this as I won't vote on arguments that are presented so I can't hear them. Impact your claims and PLEASE do not forget that arguments do not (most often) operate within a vacuum. The arguments on one page interact with the arguments on another page. I have a hard time justifying decisions at the end of a debate that require me to tell contradictory stories. I rely on consistency in argumentation when making my decision. So, creating that in your last rebuttal through articulating that "even if my opponent wins...I still win the debate..." Cross-X should be used to your advantage. You will lose points in Cross-X if you approach without a strategy. The is no convention that says "one must be nice is Cross-X." In fact, sometimes it is important to go after your opponent...lets face it...many utterances in debate are absurd. Please call BS--"BS."

I don't know if this helps...you are always free to ask particulars.

Good debating!