Glover,+Richard

Richard Glover Debate Coach McClintock High School, Arizona

I have been a competitor and judge/coach for LD and Policy debate for 19 years. I consider myself a "Progressive" judge, for the most part.


 * Style:**
 * Speed: No problem, insofar as you're clear. I will let you know if you're not.
 * Flex Prep: I have no problem if debaters choose to use some of their prep time for additional clarification questions.
 * Tag-team CX: I'm not a big fan, but I'm not wholly opposed either. Insofar as one partner is not dominating the round, leaving the other partner to look foolish, I'm good.
 * Finally, be nice. This is supposed to be fun, and there's nothing that bums me out more than rude debaters. I have used the ballot to punish debaters who were particularly rude. I don't do it often, but I would do it again.


 * Content:**
 * Theory: Demonstrable abuse is necessary for me to vote on a theory argument most of the time. I tend to find theory debates to be shockingly dull, and would much rather discuss the substantive issues in the round. That's not to say that you should avoid theory necessarily, but definitely consider the legitimacy of the argument on the discourse of the round. I tend toward a reasonability threshold before a consideration of competing interpretations.
 * Kritik: I really enjoy a good kritik debate. I'll leave it at that. All LD really is, at its core, is kritik debate anyway.
 * Topicality: like theory, my threshold is pretty low. If the case is made that the argument at stake is reasonably topical, I'm liable to buy that in most instances. Again, not all, but certainly most.
 * Most importantly: I'm pretty much open to any argument you want to run, but I expect you to be deliberate about your choices, and to provide me with significant and high-quality impacts. If you can't explain to me how this argument weighs out in evaluation of the round, I am not likely to vote on that argument. If nobody does a good job providing me with a quality impact calculus, then I am likely to start looking for my own reasons to prefer one side over the other, and I frankly don't like having to intervene like that. It ruins that whole //tabula rasa// thing that I'm going for. Do your work, so I don't have to do it for you.


 * Other things:**
 * Don't tell me lies. I can spot them, and I don't vote on things debaters say to me that are wild falsehoods. (Even if your lie goes unanswered).
 * Also, don't debate math. It mostly is just one more way to tell a lie.
 * Do feel free to ask me any clarification questions about any of these things (or any other things). I like talking to debaters, it's why I continue to coach debate.
 * Flashing Cases - this is a new thing, and while I applaud both the impulses to make evidence available in round, as well as the inclusion of technology in our process, holy crap this takes y'all FOREVER. Make it snappy with this, or I'm going to assume you're stealing prep time and keep your prep running during the flash interaction.