Judge Philosophies
Adam Hall - Regis
n/a
Aine Foran - Seattle Debate
n/a
Alexa Canchola - La Verne
n/a
Alissa Neuman - Seattle Debate
n/a
Andrea Vandiver - La Verne
n/a
Angie Tinker - PacificLutheran
n/a
Calvin Horne - KSU Debate
n/a
Cameron Wilson - DU
n/a
Celia Siade-Cox - DU
n/a
Cody Walizer - DU
n/a
Colin Burnett - DU
n/a
Corey Patton - Seattle Debate
n/a
Courtney Thomson Lichty - Wyoming
n/a
Dan Lund - Regis
n/a
Danielle Giffin - DU
n/a
Darrin Hicks - DU
n/a
Donald Mon - La Verne
n/a
Gary Gillespie - NU
n/a
John Schultz - Alaska
n/a
John Cinnamon - USAFA
n/a
John Swayne - NU
n/a
John Henry Murdy - CLEM
n/a
Jon Denzler - Regis
n/a
Josh Martin - Regis
n/a
Kim Pineda - La Verne
n/a
Kristina Campos - ACU
<p>I was a CX debater in high school (in the Dallas, TX circuit), and NDT/CEDA debater at ACU in college (we broke at CEDA nats several years), and now I coach Parli and Worlds at ACU.</p> <p>I have been away from the debate world for the last 12 years while pursuing a Ph.D. and starting out as a professor. So, I understand the basics of all the arguments you will make, however, I might not always know the latest name for it. So, make sure you explain to me what it is instead of assuming I know. </p> <p>--Speed is fine. If I can't understand you, I will let you know. </p> <p>--T debates are fine. </p> <p>--Theory debates are fine.</p> <p>--Critiques are fine. I used to run them all the time and enjoy a good critique debate</p> <p>--Framework debates are fine. </p> <p>--Normal policy debates are fine.</p> <p>--I'm iffy on performance debates, probably not a good idea with me.</p> <p>I prefer a strong overview and/or impact analysis in the PMR and LOR. </p> <p>My default judging paradigm is utilitarian, but I will let you put me in a different paradigm if the argument is good. </p> <p>I am still getting reacquainted with the nuances of arguments that are popular now. So, you probably will want to ask me some more specific questions before the round starts. </p> <p>After reading through other judging philosophies, I realized I have to tell you that I won't vote for teams that are rude or actually abusive to their opponents. (what?!?, how is this not common sense). Please use courtesy and be nice to each other, you can be assertive and make good arguments without being a jerk. I am not impressed by big egos or people who need to make themselves feel stronger by being ugly/rude/offensive to others. That is a good way to lose my ballot. </p> <p> </p> <p> </p>
Luke Cahill - Regis
n/a
Madelinne Pope - CLEM
n/a
Mark Schmutzler - Carroll
n/a
Marlene Pierce - KSU Debate
n/a
Michael Harvey - USAFA
<p>I enjoy a thoughtful debate without pre-canned arguments. I will attempt to flow everything. Even if an argument appears rather inane, please address it even if it's brief. Please show courtesy to each other.I am not overly fond of critiques, but will listen.</p>
Natasha Nguyen - Cal Poly SLO
n/a
Quincy Slayton - La Verne
n/a
Rachael Savage - CLEM
n/a
Rico Hilliard - USAFA
Ruby Nunez - Regis
n/a
Sarah McClellan - USAFA
n/a
Steven Johnson - Alaska
n/a
Taylor Katz - ACU
<p>I'm a new member of the debate community, so arguments that are highly technical, overly reliant on jargon, or exotic in nature are not likely your best bet. I'm interested in narrative, so the best way to gain my support is to have a clear story. Give me a strong summary and let me know why you deserve my vote. I'm not particularly familiar with the customs, rituals, or culture of the debate community, so the best thing you can do is be courteous and professional.<br /> <br /> Quickness of speech is welcome if accompanied by an equal measure of clarity of speech. Arguments that are out of place have little impact on me, so make sure to signpost. An argument that doesn't seem to be anywhere may as well not be anywhere.<br /> <br /> Emotional appeals and shock value are more likely to draw my scrutiny than my praise. I respect levelheadedness and clear reasoning. You're welcome to use any kind of argument you'd like, but I tend to find it more compelling when the debate sticks close to the topic at hand and does not become a debate about the nature of debate.<br /> <br /> On a personal note, almost no Star Trek reference will be lost upon me.</p>
Tiffany Wilk - DU
n/a
Travis Cram - Wyoming
n/a