Pilarski,+Nicole

 School Affiliation: Benilde-St. Margaret’s  Number of years judging: Two Years  Number of years I debated: Three Years  Topic’s judged: Approach: I look almost exclusively to the Value-Criterion and how it is integrated into his/or her arguments throughout the debate. Impacts back to the value are important to me and when all else fails I look to vote on which side is most logical or reasonable. I like voting issues though not necessary, I will extend arguments when necessary, and I appreciate sign posting. Preferences: I don’t mind speed so long as the debater is comprehendible. If the debater is speaking rapidly while simultaneously using extensive vocabulary and unnecessary words then I feel as though it is a poor use of time (aka. word economy). Otherwise I think speed is fine and I would not mark down on it. Lack of conviction is a pet peeve of mine. Using words such as “like” or “if you don’t buy that then...” tend to annoy me as a judge.
 * It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people.
 * In a democratic society, felons ought to retain the right to vote.
 * Public High school students in the United States ought not be required to pass standardized exit exams to graduate.
 * Public health concerns justify compulsory immunization.