Winkelhake,+David

I have been judging Lincoln-Douglas debate since 2009. I don't have many preferences, but want to see professional, articulate, and organized arguments.

I prefer having structure to the debate that includes value and value criterion, but it is not necessary. Alternative structures are fine, but be clear with the chosen structure. My default is to listen for the value and value criterion structure and I may miss things if I am trying to figure out what's going on while taking notes.

I can understand fairly quick speakers, but the point of LD is to communicate effectively. If you are speaking too fast and I miss something, then it just doesn't get used in the round. As far as evidence is concerned, I am fine with its use as long as its placed in context and not being used to overwhelm the other debater. If you are cross applying arguments, make sure to clearly point this out.

I appreaciate thoughtout crystallized voting issues, but they are not necessary. I don't like repeated tag lines, I want to see that you were listening to the other's arguments. And finally, the more persuasive, logical argument is the one that wins. If its not brought up during the round, it doesn't count.