Ribaudo,+Dominic


 * Time Debating**: 4 years in High School Debate. (All LD w/ about a half year of Policy)

**Schools Debated For**: Canyon Springs

**Number of Years Judging**: This is my first year judging.

= **Philosophy**: = = = I am fine with any style of debate in LD. There are only a few notes I have for what I want to see in an LD round.

Framework: I expect to be told not only what arguments to vote for but how you want me to decide the round. So if you want me to vote on the impact analysis or if you want me to vote on the value debate, don't just tell me that you want me to vote on your value of Justice, tell me why I should decide the round on a value. If neither side gives me a sold framework, I will try and figure out what is most appropriate for the round, but to prevent judge intervention, I would recommend a good debate on framework. I tend to default on impact analysis.

Speed: I have experience with speed but I have competed a lot in slow rounds so if you want to use speed, I would recommend a slow-moderate speed in rounds. However, I would not recommend spreading tags or theory if it is an important argument to your debate.

Off Case: I enjoy rounds with well written off case arguments, but for me to vote on them, they must have all of the necessary parts. So for example if you run a counterplan, you need to win solvency, a net-benefit, and you must have a competitive plan text.

Extensions: I will only vote on arguments extended through the round.

Speaker Points: I treat speaker points like grading a multiple choice test. You start off with perfect speaks and I will lower them as you make mistakes. So if you make a bad strategic move, have a horrid speaking voice, or if you say something offensive, I will lower speaks. On the flip side, you can regain speaker points by fixing these problems.

If you plan on running any arguments that are more out of the ordinary that I have not addressed here (like irony or any other performance) please ask my feelings on it before the round.

The only thing I can think of that will drive me out of my mind in a round is timers. I expect every debater to have a working timer during rounds. Any problems resulting from not having a timer are not my responsibility nor the responsibility of the other debater. I will not expect debaters to hand their timers to opponents. If you do not have a timer, expect to be timed by your opponent and face any resulting complications.

As a final note, I feel as a judge that the choices you make during a round are your responsibility. I have had a number of rounds that I felt I lost unjustly at the time. However, looking back, I have come to realize that with any judge who was paying attention to the round, it had been me who usually failed to emphasize arguments. I will not change decisions after beginning my RFD, so if you feel my decision is wrong, you may ask questions, but it will not help to argue with my decision. So if you are concerned with something I say in the RFD ask questions which will help identify the mistake that was made instead of something that puts me on the defensive. For example, "I did answer that argument in the 1AR and extend it in the 2AR, should I have gone slower on the argument or made a clearer extension?".


 * MOST OF ALL, IT IS YOUR DEBATE AND I WILL NOT IGNORE ANY ARGUMENT YOU MAKE, EVEN IF I EXPRESSLY TELL YOU NOT TO MAKE THAT ARGUMENT BEFORE THE ROUND. WHILE I WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO VOTE ON WEAK ARGUMENTS IF YOU DO SOMETHING I ASK YOU NOT TO, I WILL NEVER IGNORE AN ARGUMENT ON FACE VALUE.**