Watson,+Cole


 * Experience, Qualifications, Validation of my debate knowledge (whatever helps you think that I know what I'm doing)**
 * 4 year varsity debater at Iowa Park HS
 * In 2012, they gave me a bronze medal at the UIL state meet for my debate skills
 * Dr. Rich Edwards once shook my hand
 * I've judged enough debate rounds to choke a small horse
 * I study philosophy as an undergrad at UT. I know stuff about things and people and ideas and how those ideas have shaped those things and people.
 * I consult speech and debate programs on the side. Check us out. WE Coaching

**CX**
====I am a judge. I expect you to establish a framework to tell me how to evaluate the round. Whether it’s the advantages/disadvantages, in-round education/abuse, some superseding issues to the resolution, or any other concern, make sure you tell me what to evaluate first. However, if you do not provide a framework for me, I will default to a policy maker in which case I will vote on the best policy albeit the affirmative plan, counterplan, a permutation, status quo, or the alternative to a kritik. Either that or I look to why I should vote down both teams because both teams failed to provide me with an analysis of the round. Please don't let this happen. As a brain-washed, "old-school", ex-UIL debater, stock issues are still important to me. Solvency and Significance especially are near and dear to my heart. However, as a pro-TFA, "progressive", "I've now seen the light" person, I am open to any kind of argumentation as long as it is well warranted. Analysis is crucial but a correct analysis of your arguments is more important. Please don’t run something that you don’t understand. If you decide to run a topicality argument, please make sure there is a clear violation along with standards and voters. I will be quick to think the affirmative plan is “reasonably topical” if the negative team runs topicality as a “time suck” argument or if the negative team doesn’t extend the voters throughout the round. Impact calculus is vital. Explain the magnitude, timeframe, and probability in your rebuttals. In the perfect world, my RFD will be a transcript of the winning team’s rebuttal. ====

** LD **
====I evaluate LD rounds in essentially the same manner as above. I prefer value debate to stay out of policy debate which means I favor the framework debate, philosophy to empirics, and your analysis of the round to something your coach typed up. Think for yourselves. Please. For the love of debate, think for yourselves.====

//How will I win this round?//
====I believe this event is an educational event which means you, your opponent, spectators, and myself should all be educated during each round. This should sound ambiguous to you, but that’s the point. I want you to actually think about debate and how it’s benefitting you. How are you promoting education? How are you educating me? How are you being educated through debate? This should also tell you that I am a fan of debate theory and in-round impacts. And if you've read this far, then you’ll know that I prefer original theory arguments and original analysis as opposed to pre-scripted, pre-flowed, pre-thought-out arguments that your coach gave you. I will circle your team on the piece of paper that the Tab room gives me if you prove to me that you promoted the most education in the round. Debate should be educational. Debate should not be a matter of monotonous arguments that we've all heard time and time again. Challenge the preconceptions of debate and I guarantee you will find a way to win.====

1. Pretty sure that's a drug
====2. I believe this event is a speaking competition, so I expect you to treat it as such. With that being said, don't get caught up being a formal speaker and forget to be a competitive debater. If I can’t understand you because you’re speaking too fast or speaking poorly then I will not flow nor will I attempt to flow what you are saying. Take that how you will and I recommend you err on the side of caution.====

[[image:http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/80/590x/Dancing-shetland-pony-tv--445884.jpg]]
Here's a picture of that small horse that choked from all those debate rounds I've judged. Don't worry, the sweater saved her from dying.