Huberlie,+Ali

Judge: Ali Huberlie

I debated for four years on both the national and local circuits; I qualified to the TOC three times and debated at many other national circuit tournaments. That said, I am probably not the judge I used to be. I judged very frequently during my freshman and sophomore years; junior year, I judged once, and this is also my first time judging now that I'm a senior in college. So, for your sake, I decided to update my paradigm.


 * Speed:** I used to be capable of flowing almost anything. I haven't flowed in awhile, but I am assuming that this is now no longer the case. That said, I'm still a pretty fast writer, so you should feel free to go as fast as you normally do, and yell "Clear" if you need to slow down. Clarity, by the way, is enormous. Please practice spreading so that you can be clear. I will make sure, however, that you know if I do not understand you, so that you can slow down/read differently. Also, please signpost by referencing author and tag names.


 * Theory:** I was never a theory debater, and while I was introduced to it a little bit when I coached two years ago, I've since lost interest in learning about it. That said, if it is explained extremely well and warranted, I can see myself voting off of theory. But it needs to be there for a reason, and you need to spend time on it. I do lack experience evaluating huge, messy theory debates, so try to stay out of that territory...


 * Critical Arguments:** I'm fine with them as long as you explain and warrant them well. Also, reading these types of arguments at top speed is probably not the best idea.

Generally, I vote off any argument that is extended and impacted to whatever standard (criterion, burden, whatever, etc.) is also extended in the round. The above are just some of my preferences and failure to adhere to them won’t result in an automatic loss, but I feel as though being aware of them will certainly increase your chances of a win.