Hernandez,+Carlos 

Judging- Lane Tech ==== Firstly, I believe the judge's responsibility within the round is to be an unbiased spectator and judge each and every round solely on what the debaters present. It is not the judge’s responsibility to fill in holes within arguments. ====  ==== I want to be presented the information as if it were being explained to someone for the first time. If I don’t understand an argument by the end of a round then I will not consider that argument. I want to see passion, excitement, and interest in each and every argument. If you can’t convince me that you yourself are interested in what you are present ing, then I won’t be interested in what you’re presenting. I am a full time college student and juggle a variety of different responsibilities, therefore I am sleep deprived the majority of the time. This means if your presentation of the arguments come off as dull, or lackluster then I will most likely unintentionally doze off. However, if you do manage to keep my attention then that speaks volumes about both your speaking and presentational style. ==== A’s and DA’s: Best comparative analysis wins. T’s: Not my favorite thing in the world, but convince me why topicality should be a voting issue for that specific round and then this argument becomes valid. Theory: Again not my favorite thing in the world, but I’ll go there if you’d like. Cp’s: Prefer case specific counterplans. A counterplan that can utilize the affirmative’s evidence gets extra points. K’s: A personal favorite but you have to be able to articulate what a world looks like in a world where the alternative is implemented. What are a few pragmatic courses of actions that can be taken a result of the alternative? Also, when running a K I have to feel that the debater is genuine and passionate about the argument, otherwise the effectiveness of it becomes muddled and I’m less likely to vote on it. In short, don’t run a kritik you’re not passionate about because I won’t vote on it. Don’t hyperventilate: Spreading is fine as long as it does not compromise clarity. Also, I don’t want to feel like a computer is just running through a list of information for me. You’re a human being, with human being vocals and tones meant to emphasize certain emotions. Use those. Clear signposting is a good thing. Speaker Points I begin with a 27. From there, I add points to reward good strategy, persuasion, argumentation, speaking style, and just being an all-around good human being. I deduct points for the opposites of things I add points for.