Ren,+Gabe

North Allegheny '16 Penn Wharton '20 2017 Penn Liberty Bell Classic Jr. Director

Updated April 2017: Penn Round Robin. I haven't had time to judge much on the circuit this year, so don't start off spreading at your fastest speed.


 * Lincoln Douglas:**

I come from a very traditional area and was a lone wolf on the national circuit my junior and beginning of senior year. Although I didn't have the resources to attend a slew of national tournaments, I bid at two tournaments and reached an additional two bid rounds.

I consider myself a "circuity traditional" judge and will vote off of whatever is presented in round. This means I will vote off of arguments even if they aren't presented in "standard debate specific jargon." For example, if a progressive debater chooses to run theory against a traditional debater, and the traditional debater adequately responds to the theory albeit not in "proper shell format," I will vote for the traditional debater. I have no problem voting for more progressive argumentation e.g. tricks, skep but realize that these techniques don't automatically make you better than someone "less tech" than you.

I will base speaks primarily off of speaking ability in round and secondarily off of other factors such as strategical decision making in round. Speaks will be relatively adjusted based off of the difficulty of the tournament, but I will probably average around a 27.5 I will deduct speaks if you are rude to me and/or you opponent. If you are a veteran debater going against a new debater, I expect you to adjust your strategy accordingly. I will severely tank your speaks if you decide that going four off against a new debater is ok. I will happily inflate your speaks if you make the round a useful learning experience for the other party.

I tend to get distracted during CX so make sure to actively get my attention if you are talking about a really important point and reference the CX argument specifically in your next speech.

With regards to argumentation, you can really run anything you want as long as you weigh. You can ask more about what I default to before the round, but as a judge I have no strong personal views on how a debate should be structured beyond this activity serving as a growing experience for the debaters themselves.

I don't intend for this to be the most in-depth paradigm, so feel free to ask any questions you may have before round. Rather, I wanted to make sure my paradigm established the type of positive debating atmosphere I enjoy judging. Don't hesitate to come up to me and chat at a tournament, especially if you are a lone wolf.


 * Public Forum:**

I come from a LD background but have judged my fair share of PF rounds. Please weigh your impacts and give a proper roadmap. I tend to get distracted during cross so make sure to actively get my attention if you are talking about a really important point and reference the cross argument specifically in your next speech.