Judge Philosophies
Alecia Kissel - Marian Univ
n/a
Ashley Coker - Ball State
n/a
Carolyne Wilhelm - UIndy
n/a
Casey Sabella - Ball State
n/a
Chad Woodward - UIndy
n/a
Dallis Pike - Ball State
n/a
Derek Tulowitzky - Ball State
n/a
Drew Stewart - Marian Univ
n/a
Geoff Klinger - DePauw
n/a
Kyle Kellam - Marian Univ
n/a
Maggie Crawford - Butler
n/a
Mary Moore - Ball State
n/a
Melanie Eller - Grace
n/a
Michael Schliewe - Ball State
n/a
Michael Brown - Butler
n/a
Michael Baumann - Marian Univ
n/a
Mike Storr - Ball State
n/a
Rebekah Watson Gaidis - UIndy
n/a
Spencer Coile - Ball State
n/a
Stephanie Wideman - UIndy
n/a
Stephen Scheffel - Notre Dame
<p>I competed in all four years of undergrad, I did mostly NPDA but also some BP and IPDA. I generally try to go into debates with a tabula rasa approach, but I will not assume claims are true simply because they are not rebutted. I think presentation and communication skills are very important. I view debate as a training ground for refining our oral communication skills in order to be more persuasive in real world situations. Having said that, communication skills will not be a determining factor for me, but it probably has an unconscious effect on how I perceive the arguments. I know many people speed, and that is fine, but I will only flow what I can keep up with. If you talk extremely fast, you run the risk that I will miss one of your crucial arguments. On-case argumentation is going to be the most important aspect for me when making my final decision. Compare the aff world and the neg world and tell me which one I want to live in and why. Regarding procedural arguments, I do not like them being used as a tactic. I will vote on a topicality if I feel there has been legitimate abuse in the interpretation of the resolution. But I do not like seeing them used as a means of throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. Regarding kritiks, my views are similar to my views on a topicality. If the resolution is truly open to a kritik, I will listen and vote on a well-argued one. But if it pre-prepared and being used as a tactic, it will be an up-hill battle for you. I generally enjoy hearing debates about the resolution. I am perfectly okay with a good counterplan, but I also do not expect them. There is nothing wrong with arguing for the status quo. I see nothing wrong with points of order. I will do my best to make sure I do not take into account new arguments brought up during the final speeches, but if you hear one, remind me. Don’t just assume I noticed. Finally, please be as organized as possible. Label your arguments, and tell me where you are as you go.</p>
Taylor Pearson - Butler
n/a
Tim Sheehan - Ivy Tech
n/a
Tyler Haulotte - Purdue
n/a
Whitney Tipton - Marian Univ
n/a
William Sipe - Ball State
n/a