2017 4A District 5/6 Regional Qualifier
CBC/CSouthridge - Feb 10-11 | Status: Completed
Judge Philosophies
Amber Daniels - Wenatchee
n/a
Andrea Luther - PHS
n/a
Brandon Charbonnel - Ike
n/a
Bruce Goodell - Ike
n/a
Chuck Hamaker-Teals - Southridge WA
<p>I am the coach for Southridge High School in eastern Washington. I competed in high school debate in the 90s. I've been coaching for 18 years. Each topic has lots of ground, find it and bring the arguments into the round. Be polite and kind. Rude debaters almost never win. I can flow relatively quickly but will punish debaters’ speaks if they are unclear or unprepared. I try to vote on the flow, although I don't like Topicality run without forethought. I am not a fan of the kritik but I will vote for one. I don't mind theory arguments, I just need to be clearly told how the impact relates to what is happening in the round. I vote on issues where I can clearly see the impact in the round. I like clear, fast, well organized debates with lots of good arguments and lots of impacts. When I sit on out round panels, my decisions are very similar to those of current college debaters, not communication judges. Arguments about sources are tiresome and I am more persuaded by rationale or meta-analysis. </p>
Dave Carlson - Wenatchee
n/a
Delise Savior - DHS
n/a
Don Hendrixson - Ephrata
n/a
Drew Flesher - Southridge WA
Drew Hillman - Ike
n/a
Emily Goodell - Walla Walla
n/a
Jason Hopkins - Chiawana
n/a
Jennifer Jones - Davis
n/a
Joe Fragga - Southridge WA
n/a
Keith Swanson - Walla Walla
n/a
Khlaire Minear - Ike
n/a
Le'Ana Freeman - Chiawana
n/a
Marcos Naves - Ike
n/a
Nate Bradshaw - Ike
n/a
Nick Higgins - Chiawana
n/a
Ryan Flieder - PHS
n/a
Sara Hyde - Chiawana
n/a
Stuart McCurdy - Ike
n/a
Taylor Deardorf - Southridge WA
<p>I debated for Southridge High School but most of my judging criteria come from my experience come form my colegiate Mock Trial competitions. I am a college student at the University of Washington. Because of this experience in the trial court, PF teams would be more successful laying out cogent arguments in real world situations.</p> <p>Debaters, especially for Public Forum, should focus on clarity and well-warranted, logical arguments. That being said, debaters should feel free to use any really creative impacts or arguments as they like, as long as they can back it up and is somewhat believable. Real wolrd impacts play a huge role for me when I vote.</p> <p>Furthermore, disrespectful, overly-aggressive, and/or dishonest debaters will also be deducted significant speaker points. I expect a good clear framework or I will simply default to my personal preference for a framework.</p> <p>In the end, I will vote for the team who persuades me in believing that their side will create a better world or the least-worse world (so impacts are important for me). If the aff fails to provide any reason for change, and I feel the status quo is the most reasonable, then I will default to con because it is the aff’s job to create change and withhold the entirety of the resolution.</p> <p>I do not like to disclose unless the tournament requires to, but I am willing to give constructive feedback.</p>
Vicky Hyde - Chiawana
n/a
Wallace O'Donnell - Wenatchee
n/a