Hamilton,+Heather

I debated for St. Louis Park High School in Minnesota, graduating in 2006. I only debated LD my senior year, doing bad policy before that. I mostly debated on the national circuit and judge both national and local debate. I am currently the head coach for St. Louis Park Debate team and do (slightly better) policy debate at the U of M (however this does not affect the way I judge much). I am in my 4rd year judging. For theory arguments I feel they need standards as well as developed voters and generally evaluate it the same as any other argument (although it generally comes before other arguments--assuming you tell me this--unless you tell me otherwise). I am not familiar with much critical literature but will listen to anything, however a critical argument may take more explaining than traditional argumentation. Most people's top speed is fine, however I do prefer debaters to slow down when summarizing the round. I love performance debates, however do not get to judge them often. When I debated I ran a lot of apriori's and offcase, although I really enjoy a good case debate as well. If you don't want to use a value and criterion that is fine just tell me what the alternative is and why it proves the resolution true/false. I love it when there is a good impact debate, and generally wish debaters told me what to do with arguments they made more (i.e. you win the definition, but why do I care? What does it do for you?) Overall I would generally call myself a fairly tab judge. If you have any questions just ask me.