Danielson-Francois

Danielson-Francois, Serge 1987 serge@divinechildhighschool.org Coach a team, Occasionally judge 2 Hypothesis Tester
 * Judge Name **
 * High School Graduation Year **
 * Judge Email **
 * How would you describe your Policy Debate experience? **
 * How many rounds have you judged on this year's topic? **
 * What is the best descriptor of your judging style for policy debate? **
 * Judge Preferences **
 * ** Rate of Delivery **Moderately Slow
 * ** Quality of Arguments **Relatively Few
 * **Topicality** Moderately often
 * ** Counterplans ** Acceptable
 * **Generic Disadvantages** Unacceptable
 * **Conditional Negative Positions** Sometimes acceptable
 * ** Debate Theory Arguments **Acceptable
 * ** Kritik Arguments ** Acceptable
 * Please indicate your overall judging paradigm. **

I listen for coherent, persuasive and civil arguments and am swayed by mindful attention to language and consistent integration of critical theory in the framing of warrants, claims and evidence.

I consider civility the sine qua non of public discourse about public policy. It should be evident that you respect your opponent as much as you respect this adversarial exercise.

Be bold, but remain reasonable in your assertions. No one benefits from ad absurdum reasoning.

Beware of entertaining logical fallacies for rhetorical effect.