Carbonara,+Lily

Having been an LD debater for 4 years (2004-2008) at Monticello High School, I understand the activity pretty well. I am currently an Integrated Marketing Communications Major with a Legal Studies Minor at Ithaca College and will be graduating May 2011, if anyone cares.

As far as the round goes, I highly emphasize a values debate. I would rather have three well supported and debated arguments on the flow than 30 blippy arguments where that force me to vote not off of the quality of the arguments but the quantity. As long as a clear value is established for the round (I dont care if it's just a premise or just a criterion or if you settle on one that wasn't even originally in either case), and it is used to weigh each argument, I will be a happy judge. **Be sure to impact back to this value!**

As for the arguments themselves, you're best assuming I don't have an extensive knowledge of the topic (Ithaca isn't close to many tournaments, so I don't really have a chance to judge much). Bearing that in mind, explain things. I'm not stupid, so don't talk down to me, but just make sure your point is clear (granted you should be doing this anyway). Same goes for if you're doing anything funky; as long as it is well warranted and explained go for it. Don't make a weird argument just for the sake of messing with your opponent; it should be done for a reason.

Lastly, **DO NOT speed read.** If I can't understand what you read, I will be inclined to not flow it, and I prefer to not have to call cases/cards at the end of rounds to read what the heck you'd been talking about. Part of debate is learning how to present arguments clearly and articulately (a VERY valuable skill to have) but speed reading undermines this notion. Also, be sure to signpost so I know where to flow things.

Do not hesitate to ask me questions before or after the round.