Montero-Colbert,+Arianna

Updated 1/9/15: Judging at the Newark Invitational.

Background: I competed as an LD debater at Ridge for all four years of high school; I bid my senior year at Newark. I also debated locally and at cattynats.

General: I would describe my speed as being a step or two down from circuit level-- you can also speak a lot quicker if intonation actually happens but the majority of the circuit seems to poo-poo on this strategy. Try your speed on me and I'll say clear without docking speaks unless you don't adapt. As a debater, I predominantly valued well-thought out ethical or critical debate strategies. That is absolutely not to say that I will not evaluate arguments I didn't personally run, just that I appreciate those strategies most and will probably evaluate those most effectively. Do whatever works best for you.

Theory: I'm not very good at flowing it (so you'll have to slow down reading it and I don't advise making it your A strat for the round). I am also generally very receptive to nuanced, developed responses to it theory as long as they are well implicated with regards to the terminal burdens and role of the ballot/judge/debater in the round. To you trickster theory debaters, that also means you're going to have to make it very clear why/how something you are extending out of the shell (or AC or whatever it be) actually answers this. In high school I was very vehemently opposed to the idea of debate as a game and using theory for a strategy, but if you manage to argue it persuasively to me (while adhering to my yelling "clear"s), then I'll hear you out. As with all arguments, I expect a voting story presented at the end of the speech telling me the interaction between the different layers.

Random notes and speaks: - I like when people throw out a smart analytic turn off the top of their head. It's cool. - I like well thought out, developed arguments as opposed to short blips. - If I make a decision in one round, that doesn’t necessarily mean I’m voting “against” an argument in the sense that I won’t vote on that in the future or that I’m not a good judge to run those type of arguments in front of. All that me voting against an argument means is that I did not feel the execution of that strategy made the ballot in that round.

You can ask me further questions before the round, or reach me at ariannamc18@gmail.com.