Worthey,+Joe

I'd rather keep this short and sweet compared to some other judges who have written out eloquent and thoughtful paradigms.

I debated 4 years in high school in Hillsboro, Oregon at Century High School. I won state, qualified and broke at NFL nationals twice, and broke at some regional tournaments. I don't debate in college, but I am a student at business economics and finance student with a political science minor at Gonzaga (class of 2013).

Philosophy:
 * 1) I do not have much experience on this topic. This is important to note because I am not going to have some predisposed understanding of anything you're reading, unless I heard it in high school. This probably means that you will need to explain your arguments clearly and eloquently at some point, or else I might be confused and that could be your demise.
 * 2) I do not necessarily have a judging philosophy. I'm rather laissez-faire, and believe that you have the ability to direct this round in whichever way you choose. You make sure you tell me HOW I am supposed to vote, and WHY.
 * 3) In high school I was a mixed debater, but wasn't as into the K as some of you might be. We took advantage of speed, and tried to spread. I was never a fan of procedurals. That being said, that doesn't necessarily impact my voting. I'm totally interested in hearing your arguments as long as you explain them well and beat your opponent on the flow.
 * 4) I'm a flow judge. You will tell me what arguments are the most important, I'll evaluate each flow, and decide which arguments are most important. It is really nice when debaters in their final speeches make this very simple by picking the arguments that are most important on the flow, highlighting them, and then discussing how that impacts the grand scheme. Eg. Explain how the CP absorbs the case, why that means the negative would win the round, why you're winning the 3 important arguments on the flow (eg. perm, theory, and disad to the cp), and how if you win those 3 arguments that means a victory for the neg.

I see others talking about speaker points. I'm rather generous, believing that variability in speaker points can jeopardize a teams ability to advance. Unless you do something bad or need more practice, you'll likely receive good speaks.