Letak,+Liz


 * Liz Letak**

__A Little About Me__ __Relax, Debate is Fun__ __Win on the Merits, Not at the Expense of Your Opponent__ __Substantively, Anything Goes__ __Helpful Hints__ __Decision Making__ Don’t hesitate to ask me anything else or clarify anything I have written. Also, if you would like to hear the “Debate is the gift that keeps on giving far beyond what you can conceive of it in High School” speech, I’m happy to give you any variation of it! Email: Liz.Letak@gmail.com *The spelling of this word was intentional.
 * Former LD debater (and FXer) for Benilde – St. Margaret’s in St. Louis Park, Minnesota (1999-2002). NFL, CFL, TOC, and Round Robin participant.
 * Avid Mock Trial and Moot Court participant in college and law school.
 * Currently, a practicing attorney in Salt Lake City and assistant debate coach at Alta High School.
 * When it comes to “logistics,” the floor is yours. Sit, stand, read from a computer, a tablet, move around - persuasion takes many forms.
 * As a general rule, any request or suggestion you make will be granted so long as it is reasonable and does not prejudice your opponent.
 * Reasonable Requests: “flex prep time,” asking your opponent questions of clarification outside of CX, requesting to see a particular piece of evidence/Contention, looking over your opponent’s shoulder if he/she is reading a mile a minute, off time roadmaps.
 * There is nothing wrong with a smile.
 * Stay Classy. I am a very open minded person, but not when it comes to bullying your opponent or making ad hominem attacks.
 * Be the Ideal Opponent. I am completely in favor of “crazy” arguments and obscure philosophy. However, if you are unable to explain what you are arguing to your opponent in CX in simplistic terms that a reasonable opponent should understand, then you need to re-think if what you are arguing is a good idea.
 * Similarly, I consider a position “abusive” when your opponent has no feasible way to win the round based on the burden you are attempting to establish.
 * On the other end of the spectrum, don’t call an argument or position “abusive” merely because it is foreign or inconvenient to address. I will never fault a debater for using CX to clarify and understand an opponent’s argument.
 * I, as a judge, will entertain any argument(s) you want to make. Theory, Kritiks, Philosophy, Plans, CPs, and Anti-Values/Lack of Values are all permissible. High School debate is one of the unique times in your life that you can make “out of the ordinary” well-reasoned unconventional arguments. Take advantage of it. See also my point below about "Voir Dire."
 * Emphasize the points you want me to write on my flow. Tag lines. Names of authors for cards. Impacts. Things you are going to extend in rebuttal.
 * Speed is ok, so long as it is clear. I reserve the right to say "clear" if you are going too fast. Also, please be mindful if your opponent can't handle speed. This doesn't mean you can't go fast, but if you are a varsity debater who is hitting a novice who is having his/her first circuit round, be nice. Flash your case.
 * Excellent word economy and clarity really impress me.
 * Overviews/Underviews - especially the "this is what is happening in this round from a 10k view" type are very much appreciated in intense line by line debates.
 * Give Voters. State the Issue, summarize the arguments, and tell me why you win that issue.
 * Weigh the Impacts. Tell me why your argument matters and why it outweighs your opponent's.
 * For the rounds where there are multiple flows (i.e. a K, Theory, Plan), please tell me what I should evaluate first and why.
 * I rarely call for cards (unless there is an evidentiary dispute) so please explain to me the warrant + implication and don't just say, "This card is amazing and takes out all of the Aff's offense." Fabulous, how does it do that?
 * You can absolutely feel free to "Voir Dire" me before the round starts. By this I mean, if you are thinking about running a certain position and are hesitant, ask me about it. "Are you open to anthro K's?" And I will definitely respond, "S(h)ure!"* If you ask me about something with which I am not familiar, I'll tell you. This then gives you the opportunity to educate me about how something works which in turn makes me a better judge. Debaters are using a lot of acronyms / jargon for things that simply didn't exist in 2002. It doesn't mean I'm not open to it, but just need you to explain to me how it functionally works.
 * Literary References, one-liners, analogies, Real World examples, pop culture jokes, anything animal related, sassy yet respectful quips, and "debate humor" are all welcomed and encouraged.
 * I will try my absolute best to be the judge I wanted to have for LD rounds in High School: the open-minded, relaxed, well-informed, non-interventionist. To the best of my human ability, I will not interject my personal opinions or knowledge into the round (although I reserve the right to “make a suggestion” to you after I fill out the ballot).