Zimmermann,+Steve

I am a parent judge for Walt Whitman High School. I’ve been judging for 4 years mostly at local tournaments, but haven’t judged at all this year.

I will flow to the best of my ability, but can’t always get down every argument you make, so if you speak too quickly for me to understand your argument doesn’t matter. I appreciate debaters who make the structure and impact of their arguments very clear—clearly signposting arguments geographically on my flow is important, as otherwise I will have no idea what your argument is supposed to be answering, what value criterion it links to, etc.

When making a decision, I first look to the standards debate. The winning criterion then becomes my lens for the round—the debater that best meets this criterion wins. I will try to evaluate this part of the debate as objectively as possible, but am not very experienced making a decision strictly based on the flow. That means crystallization in your final speeches is crucial.

I am familiar with most basic debate jargon (warrant, extend, etc.), but would prefer you avoid more complicated positions that don’t function under the value-value criterion model, as I will have a hard time understanding their relevance to the round.

I award speaker points for strategic and intelligent decisions and persuasiveness of your arguments. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask before the round.