{"text_format":"1","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["MS Nats '17 CX Judge Paradigms."],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":0,"defined_names":0,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"MS Nats '17 CX Judge Paradigms.","index":0,"n_rows":25,"n_cols":20,"rows_kept":25,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["Name (First)","Name (Last)","School","Coach","CX debater in college","Debated CX in high school","current high school CX debater","frequently judge CX","CX rounds judged this year","Approach to judging","RATE OF DELIVERY:   1 (slow & deliberate) to 5 (very rapid)","QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS:           1 (few well-developed arguments) to 5 (more arguments the better)","COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES:                                        1 (communication skills most important) to 5 (resolving substantive issues most important)","TOPICALITY - I am willing to vote on topicality: 1 (often) to 5 (rarely) ","COUNTERPLANS: 1 (acceptable) to 5 (unacceptable)","GENERIC DISADVANTAGES:   1 (acceptable) to 5 (unacceptable)","CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS:     1 (acceptable) to 5 (unacceptable)","DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS:               1 (acceptable) to 5 (unacceptable)","CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS:           1 (acceptable) to 5 (unacceptable)","In approximately 100 words or less, please add any brief comments that you feel are appropriate. (You may want to include information about practices you encourage or discourage in a round.)"]
["Manasi ","Singh","West Des Moines Valley",null,null,"x",null,null,"0-10","tabula rasa",5,2,3,3,2,2,1,2,1,"I'm willing to vote on anything, as long as it isn't offensive/discriminatory in some way. My debate style was primarily kritiks, I've done a bit of everything from fem to Deleuze, but I specialized in fem rage."]
["Never","Rose","University Academy","x","x","x",null,null,"0-10","games-playing",5,1,5,2,1,1,1,1,1,"I enjoy debates that the debaters seem to be enjoying. You do you and I'll follow. It will be cute. I participated in policy debate throughout high school and finished my first year on the KCKCC team this year. I began doing LD and Parliamentary for a year so a variety of argument choice/styles/speeds is OK with me.  Debate informs and is informed by the world outside of the classroom/hotel room so I prefer debate that situates itself with that in mind. You debate for a reason-revel in that."]
["Daniel","Stanfield","Harker","x","x","x",null,"x","41+","policymaker",4,2,5,1,1,1,1,1,1,"Experienced former college policy debater, and now college coach. Please read tabroom.com philosophy first before trusting the scale above."]
["Nicole","Nave","Mount Vernon","x","x","x",null,"x","21-30","tabula rasa",5,1,1,3,1,1,1,1,1,"Be nice to your opponents have fun and tell a clear story."]
["Andrea","MacIsaac","Boston Latin Academy","x",null,null,null,null,"0-10","speaking skills",1,1,1,3,3,3,3,3,3,"I was a part-time coach and mostly helped out with logistics at the school.  I have only judged one round at a debate.  I am chaperoning as the main coach of the team's wife is expecting a child at the time of the tournament.  I will judge if I must, but I'm not a skilled or experienced judge."]
["Anika","Jain","Harker","x",null,"x",null,"x","11-20","policymaker",4,2,4,1,1,1,1,1,1,"Experienced policy high school debater (just graduated from Harker). Read tabroom.com philosophy before trusting anything above."]
["Molly","Wancewicz","Harker","x",null,"x",null,"x","11-20","policymaker",4,2,4,1,1,1,1,1,1,"Experienced policy high school debater (just graduated from Harker). Read tabroom.com philosophy before trusting anything above."]
["Maggie","Solice","Harker","x","x","x",null,"x","41+","policymaker",4,2,4,1,1,1,1,1,1,"Experienced policy college debater, and policy high school coach/judge. Read tabroom.com philosophy before trusting anything above."]
["Miles","Gray","Harker","x","x","x",null,"x","41+","policymaker",4,2,4,1,1,1,1,1,1,"Experienced policy college debater, and policy high school coach/judge. Read tabroom.com philosophy before trusting anything above."]
["Sharon","Cella","King Arts","x",null,null,null,null,"11-20","tabula rasa",3,2,4,3,1,1,1,3,3,"I am fine with teams timing themselves, but I do not like it when a team \"takes over\" keeping track of timing for the round. I feel it can be interpreted as a passive aggressive move. You must roadmap and signpost. I definitely prefer fewer arguments and arguments with substantive evidence. Speaking quickly is fine, but if I can't actually understand what your evidence is saying, I will likely not give that evidence as much weight. Please approach each round as an opportunity to learn and with respect for your opponents."]
["Monica","Medeiros","University Academy",null,"x","x",null,"x","11-20","games-playing",5,3,5,2,1,3,1,2,1,"5 combined years of Policy Debate experience in both high school and college. I am thoroughly versed in the traditional deployment of policy debate arguments, (theory, topicality, CP's, DA's, etc) however, I am also a performance/critical theory debater, with experience in a broad range of literature. I think that critiques, etc, are incredibly effective at winning rounds on both the affirmative and negative. I don't hate FW debates, but I think impacts must be clear and I rarely find myself voting for fairness impacts: win that debate, or I'm just bein honest."]
["Christian","Kline","Dr. Bessie Rhodes School of Global Studies","x",null,"x",null,"x","21-30","tabula rasa",4,4,4,1,1,1,1,1,1]
["Freeman","Tong","Wesley Academy",null,null,null,null,"x","0-10","hypothesis tester",3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,"I value the presentation of the debate a lot, and look for good eye contact, diction, and inflection of the voice. Clearly link our cases to your value/ value criterion to ensure clear links. Also, make sure to be respectful to your opponent during cross-examinations."]
["Thane","Zeeh","Draper Park Middle School","x",null,null,"x","x","11-20","tabula rasa",5,3,4,2,3,1,3,2,1,"Debate is a game, hypothetical, I feel like arguments (Ks) that promote change still fall into the practice of debate, so with that in mind, I vote on the framework that the team puts out and pushes for the most with good arguments.  I'll vote on any argument, however I do find 3+ neg conditional advocacies a little abusive. I'll devolve to policy frameworks unless told otherwise.  Speed is great, I'll say clear 2 times if I'm unable to understand you."]
["Pamela","Doiley","McCormack Middle School","x",null,null,null,null,"0-10","stock issues",3,4,4,3,2,2,3,4,3,"Kritiks have their place in debate, but it must be linked to a substantive argument. Far-fetched philosophical arguments with a tenuous connection to any aspect of the debate are discouraged.  What's especially important is the development and thoroughness of the arguments."]
["Karen","Allen","Hopewell","x",null,null,null,null,"11-20","tabula rasa",2,1,3,1,1,1,1,1,1]
["Andrea","MacIsaac","Boston Latin Academy","x",null,null,null,null,"0-10","speaking skills",1,1,1,5,5,5,5,5,5,"I was a part-time coach this year and am not very comfortable judging rounds.  I only judged twice at competitions.  If there are any speaking competitions, I feel I would be more suited for those."]
["Alli","Abdullah","Marvin Baker Middle School",null,null,null,"x",null,"0-10","tabula rasa",4,3,2,3,3,3,2,2,1]
["Noah","Schrick","Tulsa-Union (OK)","x",null,"x",null,"x","41+","games-playing",4,3,5,1,1,1,1,1,1,"For the most detail, read my paradigm info on the judge philosophies wikispace . Same name as listed here (Noah Schrick)"]
["Anika","Jain","Harker",null,null,"x",null,null,"0-10","policymaker",5,3,5,1,1,1,1,1,1,"I did policy for four years at Harker, as both a 2a and 2n. I primarily read policy/plan affs and most commonly went for da/cp while neg. However, I will make decisions based on how the round progressed, not based on preconceptions of what debate should be."]
["Molly","Wancewicz","The Harker Middle School",null,null,"x",null,null,"11-20","policymaker",5,3,5,1,1,1,1,2,1,"I just graduated from Harker (class of 2017), and I debated policy for Harker for 4 years. Don't be rude. Tech over truth - this obviously has a limit though since at the end of the debate you still need an explanation of why the argument matters. If this happens, I will definitely vote on dropped arguments. Planless affs - I’m definitely neg-leaning in the planless aff vs. topicality debates. I find topical version of the aff arguments very persuasive. However, I will vote for a planless aff. Kritiks - I'm not familiar with a lot of these arguments, especially high theory, so explain your argument and contextualize it to the aff. I am willing to vote on case outweighs against most kritiks given that it's well-explained in the 2ar. Disads and counterplans - My favorite debates (especially disad vs case debates). I have a higher threshold on voting for neg arguments that aren't contextualized to the aff. Topicality (vs policy affs) - Make sure it’s impacted. Theory - I'm pretty aff-leaning on cheating counterplans like consult, add-a-condition, object fiat, etc. Other than that, just make sure to answer your opponents' arguments instead of relying on blocks"]
["Karen","Allen","Hopewell Middle","x",null,null,null,null,"11-20","tabula rasa",3,1,3,3,1,1,1,1,1,"Development and communication of the arguments is most important. Really explain the key issues and try to avoid dropping arguments."]
["Sohail","Jouya","University Academy","x","x","x",null,"x","41+","hypothesis tester",3,3,3,2,1,1,2,1,1,"I find a lot of these questions unhelpful and useless, if you have questions, feel free to ask me in person: Full philosophy found here: https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?search_first=sohail&search_last="]
["Robbie","Quinn","Montgomery Bell Academy","x","x","x",null,"x","41+","policymaker",4,3,4,2,1,1,1,1,1,"I determine which way to evaluate any argument based on who most convinces me of the superiority of a certain way to evaluate it. Cross-ex is very important to me and I watch it closely. I think it sways my thinking on key issues. What judge won't admit to actively monitoring who seems to be winning? Cross-ex, to me, is a powerful barometer of that."]