Philip Sharp

[kissmycls]

This is from the 2006 NPTE.

Philip Sharp
University of Montana

Parli Debates judged this year: 60
Non-Parli Debates judged this year: 0
Years Judging Debate: 6
Years Competed in Debate: 3
What School Competed at: Western Washington

Making Decisions: none of the above. I vote for the team that makes winning arguments. I will vote for anything but you must make a quality argument and explain why i would vote based upon that argument.

Decision-making Approach: I vote using the criterion that the teams advocate depending on who wins the criteria debate.

Assessing Arguments: that argument s weight depends on how strong it is I prefer line by line in constructives and big picture in rebuttals.

Presentational Aspects: As long as you give analysis speed is not an issue. I WILL SAY HERE AND NOW THAT I REFUSE TO VOTE FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU SPREAD SOMEONE OUT OF THE ROUND USING BLIPPY ANALYSIS AND BAD ARGUMENTS. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IS GOOD DEBATE. Don t be offensive I am liberal. Talk pretty it helps but you don t have to stand up if you don t want to.

Strong Viewpoints: Don t be offensive. I am liberal

Cases, DAs, CPs, Ks, T, etc.: Go For It!

Other Items to Note: My judging is honest. I will honestly tell you that every judge could make a different decision in every round. I try to be consistent. I try to vote on the arguments in round using my experience to evaluate who was winning in areas of clash. I would prefer that you tell me why I should vote for you so that I can decide if that sounds right. Otherwise I decide the best I can and it might not be a vote for you.