Monahan,+John


 * Background:** I competed in policy debate (among many, many, many other events) at E.L. Meyers High School in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. in 2002 and 2003. I generally coach our speech team at practice and judge LD at tournaments for the past ten years. Consider me a utility judge who places importance on communication.


 * __Everything you need to know about me and then some:__ **


 * The value is the pinnacle argument in the round. Everything else should link well to the value. It shouldn't be something that is just floating at the top of the case without any links. Being well-structured ensures clashing throughout the round.
 * I'm generally open to different kinds of arguments as long as they remain structured. I don't believe the notion that Lincoln-Douglas should be strictly a debate about two relic philosophers. That said, I can't stress this enough -- I do not want to hear a policy debate round in an LD room. Take that for what it's worth. It shouldn't be a debate about evidence. I should not hear the words "cards" in a room.
 * This is a communications event; therefore, you should be comprehensible. Speed at your own risk. If I nor the competitor can not hear your argument, then the argument does not exist in the round.
 * Things I really like: warrants, refutation, analysis.
 * Things I really dislike: spreading, rudeness.
 * Please please please: Don't take debate too seriously. Above all, have fun. If the round turns into a debate over the Hamburgler's crimes in McDonaldland, then roll with it. Think outside of the box.
 * Please please please: Don't take debate too seriously. Above all, have fun. If the round turns into a debate over the Hamburgler's crimes in McDonaldland, then roll with it. Think outside of the box.