Middleton,+Mark

I coach for West High School and have judged for a number of years.


 * LD **

I am open to most types of argumentation and will generally allow the debaters to focus on where the round should go. Nonstandard argumentation is fine as long as you explain why you are doing it. That said, I would much rather the debate not bog down in definitional arguments or theory. I will vote on these if that is where the round ends up, but I’d prefer to avoid these arguments. My threshold for theory is high, especially for potential abuse. Theory is a tool to be used to combat actual abuse in debate rather than a convenient argument that your opponent must answer or lose. If you are running theory I will vote on it, but frivolous theory is likely to hurt you.

Make sure any argument you make is well warranted and well explained. I will pretty much vote on anything if I understand it and understand how it works to win the round. Don’t assume that I know whatever it is you’re running, explain it. The more you outline how you win the round, the more likely I am to evaluate things your way. If you don’t tell me where to go, I’ll try to figure it out and that doesn’t always turn out how you may have wanted. Voters are particularly helpful in this regard.

As far as speed goes, I can normally keep up, although clarity is more of a problem than speed. If you are fast, you must be clear. Speed should not be a substitute for detailed analysis or depth or argumentation. This is especially true for spikes, if you are running several lines of spikes the odds are I will miss some. Slow down and make sure to crystalize.

I’m primarily a progressive LD judge, so take that for what you will. I understand the vast majority of the jargon and arguments used in policy but am not as familiar with structure and the policy flow. I appreciate strong signposting and slowing down for authors and taglines. Speed is typically fine.
 * Policy **

For more technical arguments like theory or PICs you may want to go more in depth than you would for a typical policy judge as I am not as familiar with these. Also, I believe I have a higher threshold than average for things like topicality due to my experience in LD.