here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

Relative importance of on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:
On Case Clash/DA’s
I tend to give leniency on “uniqueness” for opposition/negative teams when running
DA’s. Especially in NFA LD where Affirmatives can build a very tight case, or in Parli
where the Government can interpret the resolution to specific parameters. DA’s always
help, but I will flow on case responses too. There are still stock issues to consider,
including harms, solvency, inherency, and minor repairs. Run those on case, and you
might have my ballot—you can seal the deal with a DA.
Openness to critical/performative styles of debating:
The K Debate
The only time I have voted for a K is when the Government/Affirmative completely
mishandled the position and demonstrated inferior debating abilities. Other than that, K’s
that critique language or other mindsets are flowed and as long as the Government makes
reasonable responses, I will not weight the K in the round. I tend to use a policy-maker
paradigm in that regard and I want to move towards the plan debate as quickly as
possible.
Any additional comments:
I tend to be conservative in my judging.
Roberts, Sean
Carroll College
Background of the critic:
Name: Sean Roberts
Years competing: 4 at the collegiate level for Carroll College
Last year competed: 2007
Years judging: 1
4 year high school LD debater in Washington State.
4 year Parli debater at Carroll College. Fifth at NPDA in 2007.
137