Smith,+Deann

=**Smith, Deann**=


 * Background:** **I am the coach and tournament administrator for Liberty Christian School in Argyle, TX.**


 * Judging Experience: I have judged Novice/Varsity LD, PF, and IEs for 4 years**

Updated: 02/04/16


 * LD and PF:**

__**TL;DR**__
 * Speed: NO!!!**
 * Will I "Clear" You: Yes**
 * Flex Prep: Only for Clarification**
 * Will I Call For Cards: Yes**
 * Will I disclose: Yes, if it is obvious who won the round. Otherwise give me the time to make the right decision and look over my flows. I won't disclose speaker points**
 * RFD: Sure, but don't argue.**
 * Speaker Points: See below.**


 * Traditional Casing: Preferred**
 * Philosophy: Use it**
 * Kritiks [Pre/Post Fiat]: Yes**
 * Kritiks [Discourse]: No**
 * LARPING: Sure, If justified**
 * Performance: Depends on how you justify it**
 * Theory: No**

__**Speed/Aesthetics/Pre-Post Round:**__
 * ** I am NOT a fan of spreading! If I cannot understand you, I cannot vote for you. **
 * ** I will say clear twice. If you continue to spread I will not flow you. **
 * ** Debate the resolution and the argument not your opponent (no ad ****hom attacks)**
 * ** I don't care if you stand or sit during speeches **
 * ** Flex Prep is fine, but only ask clarification questions (i.e. "What is contention three" or "Do you defend X) **
 * ** I will call for cards after the round to check validity of evidence when contested **
 * ** I disclose if I am sure who won the round, but I'm going to be honest, my oral RFDs are pretty bad. **** I flow and know what happened in the round, I'm just not the best at putting my thoughts into words. **


 * Speaker Point Scale: **
 * 30-Clear, Concise, No errors to speak of **
 * 29-Clear, Concise, but with a few too many "Ums" **
 * 28- I've heard better all day **
 * 27-You need a bit of work **
 * 26 or below- you offended me in some way **


 * Annoying phrases to avoid: **
 * "Like" **
 * "Um" **
 * "So" **
 * "IF YOU DON'T BUY THAT" (I really hate this) **

__** Traditional: **__
 * **I consider myself to be a very lay judge**
 * **These are my favorite types of debates, especially when done well and at a conversational speed**
 * **I like a good, philosophical framework with solid contentions**
 * **I prefer recent evidence [within the last 5 years] unless it is philosophical**

__**Philosophy:**__
 * **I enjoy listening to philosophy, but don't make it the crux of the round, I definitely want to hear some resolutional analysis**
 * **I understand a lot of philosophy and can reason through it, but I would avoid overly complex frameworks (Meta Ethics are a red flag, but basic philosophy is fine)**

__**Kritiks [Pre/Post Fiat]:**__
 * **I really enjoy kritikal debate when done well**
 * **I prefer when the kritik is linked to the specific position, not the resolution**
 * **You need a clear alternative, tell me what you're doing instead of the bad things (I don't like reject alts, have an implementable alt)**
 * **Please provide a strong link. I have an extremely low threshold for answers to weak k links**
 * **I am uncomfortable with ROTB/ROTJ, but I will evaluate it if presented (If you have to run a ROTB/ROTJ, try to link into the opponents framing too)**

__** Kritiks [Discourse]: **__
 * ** I don't link these. Don't run them, it's a cop out. **

__** LARPING [Plans CPs, DAs, etc] **__
 * **I am okay with these arguments so long as you can justify them**
 * **When you specify an advocacy, stick with it**
 * **NO CONDITIONALITY It makes me sad :(**

__**Performance:**__
 * **Open to it if it's not offensive**
 * **NO SLURS OF ANY KIND**
 * **Narratives are fine if properly cited IF NOT CITED AND I HAVE ANY REASON TO DOUBT THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE NARRATIVE I WILL DROP YOU**
 * **Art/Dancing performance is a lot of fun**
 * **Music performance is cool as long as it's appropriate**

__**Theory/Topicality:**__
 * **Please don't do this. It seems like you're whining and I don't like it**
 * **I'm okay with T if they're obviously way off topic**
 * **I really don't like frivolous T/Theory. If the opponent is being blatantly abusive than you're fine running T/Theory, but things like bidirectional theory are a no-go with me.**

__** Things I hate that you should know about: **__
 * **BE ON TIME! I will dock speaker points for tartiness. I'm also not afraid of the 15 min DQ rule.**
 * **When you get to the round, be prepared to debate (don't be shuffling papers or** **preflowing in round)**
 * **"Ought" vs "Just" Debates. Don't do it.**
 * **Incoherent or overly complex frameworks**
 * **Redundant Contentions or points**
 * **PRESUMPTION. There is always SOMETHING to vote off.**

__**Things that make me happy:**__
 * **GOING FOR THE JUGULAR. The one caveat is do not be mean or rude. (This is the best way to get high speaks if done in a courteous way)**
 * **Short Roadmaps and SIGNPOSTING**
 * **Clear, solid voters (Voters are a must)**
 * **When you adapt to my paradigm**
 * **When you read my paradigm and i don't have to explain it when you get here [+.2 speaks for telling me you read my paradigm before round]**


 * IF THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY BREAK:**
 * **Have Fun!!!**
 * **Running weird/off the wall cases in this situation is totally fine [Fluffy Bunnies/Death of Debate/Reptilian Illuminati/Double Drop/Decathalon/etc]**


 * IEs:**


 * ** I am NOT a progressive judge. I do not like profanity filled, non-age appropriate material. **
 * ** Watch blocking and timing. **
 * ** Make me forget I am judging, bring me into your story. **