Nelson,+Emily

Emily Nelson National Forensic League staff member

I competed in LD and policy debate in high school in Kansas from 1997-2001. I have judged intermittently since then.

I think debate is an educational activity, and you should maximize the extent to which education occurs during the round. Engage with substantive and theoretical issues that you present on a meaningful level and do the same with issues your opponent brings up. Think critically and force your opponent to do so as well.

Where Lincoln Douglas debate is concerned:

I was a philosophy major and I retain a strong interest in philosophical issues, especially moral and ethical issues. If you have any theoretical or critical issue that you want to raise, that's fine and I'll evaluate those arguments, but I would prefer you focus on the case debate, specifically the substance of the ethical issues being raised by you and your opponent.

At the end of the round, I'm going to ask myself who presents the better way of viewing the world, so you need to explain why you do.

Some preferences:


 * Speed: A good clip is fine (I was a very fast debater and I speak and listen quickly) but it's not like I've been judging tons of rounds consistently, so don't go crazy. I'm trying to flow everything you say.
 * I realize I should try to minimize my personal biases to the greatest extent possible, but I have some strongly held beliefs that will be difficult for you to overcome should they enter the picture. With respect to the fall 2013 LD topics, you should know that I think the power vested in our government, legal system, and particularly our criminal justice system is mostly illegitimate, and advocacy to place more power with these institutions, particularly at the expense of the individual, will make me cringe. You can probably argue your way out of it if you're good but the vote you receive will be grudging. With respect to the November/December topic specifically, I will let you know that I have a J.D. and will understand and entertain well argued legal theory.