Snell,+Paul

Judging Paradigm-Paul Snell Policy Debater for 4 years, Damien High School, La Verne, California Judge for Spartan Debate Institute, Michigan State University-3 summers

Paradigm: I am tabula rasa.

Standards: I expect the last rebuttal speeches to write my ballot for me. Debaters should clearly present the framework for my decision-making; why are they winning, and why are their opponents losing? They will do this by emphasizing the // impact // of their arguments (even if it’s something theoretical, I expect an elaboration of what potential abuse specifically looks like, for example). Debaters must compare the weight of their arguments to those of their opponents. I expect the arguments to clash in these rounds. The two sides should not be two ships passing in the night.

Debaters must tell me the specific arguments that they are extending and they must extend those arguments consistently throughout each of their side’s speeches. Extended arguments, and even dropped arguments, must be weighted, for example: “They dropped “x” which means “y” and “z” for the argument and the round.”

Theory, Kritiks, etc: Go for it.

Speed: Clarity is more of an issue than speed, but please signpost your tag lines and author cards. // I expect that all debaters will show absolute civility and respect to: (a) each other, (b) me, (c) any other guests in the room, and (d) the room itself. //