Pamela Brown
Affiliation - Bradley Tech High School
Background - 2 years of high school policy debate, 3 years of speech competition. 2nd year judging LD debate and 3rd judging debate overall.

For the duration of the LD debate round, I expect both competitors to respect and uphold the rules and regulations established by the WDCA. Should any competitor fail to comply with rules and regulations, the results will be an automatic loss for the round, and/or disqualification. An important note would be the careful consideration that should be taking during the cross-examination procedure. Each competitor has the right to allow or decline sharing of case evidence; however, should any of the competitors refuse to answer their opponents questions, the result will be an automatic deduction in positional speaker points.

The most important voter issue is the establishment of the best value and criterion for the round. Although standard case observations may be compelling in the 1A, the affirmative must provide a value and criterion to provide strong voting ground within the round. Should either the affirming or negating opponent fail to extend their value and criterion throughout their rebuttal, the remaining value and criterion will be highly considered within the voter issue. Should the affirming negating competitor prove that the opponent’s value doesn’t reach their criterion, the more clearly attainable value and criterion will be highly considered within the voter issue. Should both affirming and negating competitors share the same value or criterion, the establishment of the best value and criterion for the round will be a partial voting issue.

The second most important voter issue is the implementation of the topic, and or resolution within the affirming case observations, value, and criterion. Should the negating competitor prove that their opponent’s observations, value, or criterion does not uphold the topic or resolution, the most compelling negating evidence would be highly considered within the voter issue. Should the affirming competitor prove that the negating opponent fails to address the affirmative case, compelling affirming evidence would be highly considered within the voter issue.

The third and final important voter issue is weighing of case impacts within the round. Should either the affirming or negating competitor prove their case impacts outweigh and are the most substantial in comparison to their opponent’s arguments, case impacts will be a highly considerable voter issue.