Dillard,+Stephanie

Stephanie Dillard 4 Years Debate at Liberty University Lynchburg, VA 4 Years Debate Ridgeview High Jacksonville, FL

10 rounds judged on the poverty topic so far

I try to be as tabla rasa as possible. I judge the debate the way you tell me I should. I have some predispositions which are below, but they are nothing that good argumentation can't overcome.

Topicality/Theory: I like topicality debates that are well explained and not just blips of words and definitions. Be CLEAR when reading your T shell, and if you go for it, break it down well. I lean towards competing interpretations. I think limits are good. Topicality probably isn't a reverse voting issue. Kritiks of topicality are a long shot, but if explained well, do your thing.

K's: I will vote for them, but you might have to do a little more work to help me understand them. I am especially receptive to rhetoric K's. I'm not as familiar with K literature as I'd like to be, but with good explanation you're fine running a K in front of me. The more specific the link, the better.

Counterplans: Just as a heads up, as a debater I frequently went for conditionality on the aff. I think conditionality is a voter, and with good explanation, a reason to reject the team. Feel free to run your CP conditional if you want, but be prepared to defend the legitimacy of it. Consultation CPs are iffy, and I think probably abusive. I love unique CPs that don't include any of the aff plan. PICs are fine. Agent CPs are fine.

Disads: Love them, read them. The more specific a link, the better. The more unique and off the wall, the better. Politics disads are great and encouraged.

General: Profanity is not tolerated. I'll dock speaks for it. I will give higher speaks if you make an effort to dress in a professional manner (although I will NOT dock speaks if you aren't). Be funny, BE CORDIAL. Do not be rude, it's not funny or cool. Give roadmaps.

Any more specific questions? Feel free to ask me before the round.