Okine,+Kayi

I debated 2 years of LD in high school, and I have a little bit of experience judging. I am by no means a master debater or judge, so it’s crucial that you: I’m a pretty classic judge. Progressive case structures are unlikely to win me over, especially if your goal is to win the debate by undermining the resolution, or doing some policy-oriented debating. We’re doing LD, so I’m excited for earnest, value-driven debates.
 * 1) Are clear: Debate rounds move fast. If you aren’t clear about what you are arguing and why your argument is superior to your opponent’s, especially in the NR/2AR, I’m going to forget all of the stellar points you made throughout the debate.
 * 2) Always refer back to your value and value criterion: Ultimately, the way to win my vote is to show how your contentions meet your value criterion. If your value does not match with your opponent’s it’s important that you do some debating about the framework. If your opponent makes a more convincing framework case than you do, I will very likely vote for your opponent.
 * 3) Clash with your opponent: Nothing is more frustrating than a debate in which the debaters argue past each other. If you don’t make clear to me how your case is superior to your opponent’s case, I can’t vote fairly. The debate is not about showing me how your case is good, it’s about showing me how your case is superior to your opponent’s case, so make that central to your debate.