Morales,+Mary+A


 * LINCOLN-DOUGLAS PARADIGM OF MARY A. MORALES **

Head Coach – 6 years I also judge Student Congress, Public Forum and Speech. I have judged several national circuit tournaments including NSDA, NIETOC and NCFL.
 * Background: **

There’s a difference between a passionate and an abrasive debater. This is not a screaming match. I prefer all speeches to be printed out. I have little patience with debaters who spread. Clarity and speed in delivery of speech are extremely important. Make sure that I am able to write down your value premise, value criterion, and the tag lines of your contentions. I will only vote off what is clearly articulated. You will not get my vote on something that I could not understand, even if it is extended. Before I write my ballot, I analyze my flow to make sure I was able to understand your speeches and follow your arguments. I am a traditional flow judge.
 * General Overview: **

Define the specific nature and boundaries of your value. Stipulate the reasoning for choosing the value and why this is the most important value in the round. There must be a clear link between your value and criterion. I like to see a good clash between values so try to show why yours is superior. If your value is the same as your opponent’s, make sure you show how your criterion and contentions better uphold the value.
 * Value & Value Criteria: **

When warranted, I want to hear clear evidence supporting your claim. Give more substance to your claim by presenting tangible evidence to support your contentions. Make substantial and organized arguments. I will only judge what I heard and not what you should have said or refuted. I can’t read your mind. Delineate your extensions clearly. Do not extend everything for the sake of extending everything. I have my own flow and can determine whether or not you actually refuted your opponent’s arguments. I **//may//** consider topicality arguments if the definition portion of the argument is presented first. Definitions can be contextual or denotative.
 * Evidence/Argument: **

Likes – clear voting issues, good speakers, eye contact, intelligence, politeness & humility Dislikes – arrogance, senseless arguments, speed, absurd evidence, reading from your laptops
 * Likes & Dislikes: **