Robert,+Clark

As a Lincoln-Douglas Judge:

I judge a round off the arguments on the flow. Your case should flow like a mathematical proof. Victory goes ideally to the debater that constructs and sustains a logically valid argument while showing the a fallacy, inconsistency on other defect in his opponent’s argument. How I judge your argument is fairly traditional. This is an ethical debate in the end and your arguments have to deal with the resolution in a meaningful way.

I feel spreading is useless and counterproductive. In this debate format you have ample time to deploy good solid arguments. If you throw a lot of fluff at me - you force me to prioritize what your are saying and I will! You can waste your time in the round with it. I will ignore that part of your speech which is not germane to your essential argument or to your opponents argument - by spreading you could be forcing me to decide this. Your primary duty in winning is to dismantle your opponents central argument and keep your central argument intact. For a public speaker economy of argument is so essential. And, it is the public speaking aspect of this exercise that is so important. Overloading your argument is bad communication.

Come to debate the resolution as written. Counter-Plans and Kritiks can stay home. You can get very clever and creative with those and I really hate to see clever and creative lose.