Tonge,+Katelyn

Kate Tonge Judge Philosophy

Background – I debated for four years at H.H Dow High School and now go to Albion College.

General Things- I don’t consider myself a policy or K judge, I debated both in high school. There are very few arguments that I am not a fan of, just make sure you run them well and understand them.

Tag-teaming, speed, and prompting- My biggest pet peeve is when a person talks over their partner’s entire speech, you will lose speaker points. I’m fine with tag-teaming as long as it isn’t excessive, same with prompting as long as it’s not distracting. On speed, I wasn’t a fast debater but as long as you are clear I will be able to flow you.

DA's – There isn’t a whole lot you can say about them. DA’s are simple but great. Clash is always important, but make sure to tell the story.

CP's - I like CP’s, however I’m not a huge fan of agent and consult counterplans. That doesn’t mean I won’t vote for them. If you have a great one, go ahead and run it. Overall, what I look most for in a counterplan debate is comparison of worlds. You should be able to articulate why it is competitive, and what the world of the counterplan looks like. On a similar note, I am very open to theory when run well.

K's – Kritiks, when run well, can be very persuasive. Be specific in your articulation; tell the story on every level. Having a specific K facilitates that, but is not necessarily required. Either way, you need to understand the K you are running. I ran K’s frequently but I would not call myself a K debater. Framework is also important to me. Unless your K has some sort of policy option, if you lose framework you will probably lose the round.

Topicality - I used to go for T a lot in high school, but this can go either way. I am very open to T, but might be more critical if it is run badly. I default to competing interpretations, however I will be more open to reasonability if the violation is arbitrary.