Morton,+Sydney

I debated Lincoln Douglas for Washington High School for 4 years, and am a first-time judge this year. I've judged LD at two tournaments this year, and will continue judging in the future. I am a Psychology and Communications major at Creighton University and plan on going to law school after completing my undergrad. I am not debating in college; the judging definitely makes up for that.

My judging criteria are as follows:
-Be clear and concise about the points you are trying to make.

-Open-ended arguments and statements will little or no follow-through will not hold weight in the round. I cannot make the links for you, as a debater you must show me why your points line up and ultimately hold the most precedence. I will judge on what you say, not what you were trying to say.

-I judge heavily on the value/criterion debate, so show me how your arguments clearly and distinctly uphold your v/cr. An excellent debater will not only prove their case, but pull their opponent's case to their side, showing me exactly why they win.

-Feel free to define terms within the resolution, but be honest while doing so. Go ahead and find a definition of justice, utility, etc. that better suits your side of the debate, but be prepared for clash from your opponent and refute it in a way other than "well, Black's Law says so..."

-I am fine with speed to an extent, I was an LD debater so I understand how much a debater wants say in such short speeches. Make sure you are looking up at me during your speeches, because if I'm not flowing, you're going too fast. If you're going to rely on speed to get your points across, please enunciate! Otherwise, my pen goes down and your points are lost.

-I am an expressive judge: if I like something you say, you'll know it. If I don't like what you say, you'll know that too :)

-I am not a fan of off-cases and I prefer that you avoid using. They take the round in a different direction, and I feel that the affirmative wasted 6 minutes, while the negative is wasting time they could be spending attacking the affirmative. That being said, I will allow off-cases, but I can't make any promises that they will actually give you the ground you are looking for.

-Do not tell me to "flow that across" and move on to your next point. If it is important enough for me to extend across the flow, explain the impact that it has on the round and why I need to consider it when deciding the outcome of the round.

-Signposting is a MUST, because if I can't find where you are on my flow, I'll miss the point you make while looking for where you are.

-Voting issues and points of crystallization are also crucial, as it shows me what you found most important, but make sure once again that you show me the impacts that those points had on the round and WHY I need to vote on them, not just that I should.