Hi! Sorry, I've been overseas traveling, and my judging philosophy didn't get in the Judge Paradigm Book.Judge 04J142 National Forensic League NFL Nationals 2008 Desert Lights Henderson Las Vegas Nevada Foothill High School FHS judging book paradigm book policy debate cross-examination debate team debate judge code judging code judging philosophy judging paradigm list of judges.
Here's the data in the form it's listed in the Judge Paradigm Book:
04J142 Nathaniel Dempsey Clayton High School MO Yes, No, No, Yes, No, Yes, 7 years, 21-30 rounds, TR, 4, NP, 7, 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, 3.
For Question 1B, I actually did do a tiny bit of policy debate in college (and I did a fair amount of parliamentary debate) but not enough that someone who was on the circuit regularly would consider me to have been an NDT or CEDA debater, so for the purposes of telling you about my experience, the technical answer is I didn't do much
CEDA/NDT debate in college.
For Question 3, after TR, I would rank PM, SI, SS, GP, and finally HT.
For Questions 7 through 12, I made notes off to the side:
7) That doesn't necessarily mean I like
8) If they're actually competitive (CPs)
9) Make sure they link (generic positions)
10) Unless you're talking about things like CPs (conditional positions)
11) Just not too much--I want to see things get done (theory)
12) I don't really like Ks, but if you run it well and give me a clear way to evaluate it, do what you think is best for your strategy (critiques)
[Edit] removed cross-links to other web sites.
Labels: debate, las vegas, nfl nats, paradigm