Margolies,+Rachel

I debated LD all four years of high school in Aberdeen, SD. I went to state two of those years, and qualified for nationals once. I initially learned policy but only debated novice for a couple months (I'm familiar with it but it is definitely not my forte). In the three years since then I have judged on occasion (once or twice a year) and have helped my high school team by reading cases and talking through philosophy/theory with them. I'm currently a junior Communication Studies student at Missouri State.

In LD I will ALWAYS vote for the value/criterion. In my eyes there is no point to Lincoln-Douglas if you aren't offering me a solid, moral/ethical answer. I will take other points into consideration, but you can NOT win without establishing and upholding your value and criterion. I'm fine with about anything else you want to try as long as it all connects back to the big picture (v/cr).

In other forms of debate I want logical conclusions. Basically just tell me a story that flows logically from beginning to the middle to the end where either everyone lives happily ever after or the world blows up in smoke - so show me the bigger picture. Analysis is KEY. I'm also a sucker for a well done T debate.

As far as speed - you're good as long as I can understand you and keep up. I'm a pretty quick writer, but if I'm still writing sub point B and you're on to D we are probably going to have some issues.

If there is anything I've missed that you REALLY want to know about, just ask. Neither of us gain anything if you just guess about what I might vote on. I want to see the best debate I can, and sometimes that means asking questions in prep.