Johnson,+Walt

My "paradigm" is simply to be impressed by a debater's arguments and ability to communicate these arguments-- and yes i know that is vague. having debated for four years at Montgomery Academy and policy for 1 year at Alabama (before they cut debate for IEs :), I tend to have a very elitist view of debaters on any level, and thus in general think that most folks involved in debate are comparatively the smartest people around. because of this i leave a lot of room for those i judge to decide what they think the best strategy (in terms of structure, content, and style) for a certain round is. in some rounds that may mean running 7 minutes of theory at light speed in a 1NR, in some rounds that might mean a completely impromptu, slow and persuasive rebuttal. i have found both sides of the "debate spectrum"-- from very technical to very traditional-- to be preferable at certain times, and i generally think i vote for the debater who best communicates an advocacy in an appropriate manner