benmccollister

Ben McCollister, Dirigo High School
 * [[image:CIMG1254.JPG width="280" height="195"]]

1. What is your educational and/or professional background? I am human, graced with self awareness and a curiosity about my world. My education is life and I live my life like a professional. On off days I am a systems analyst. I do have a BA degree. 2. Estimating, how many rounds of Public Forum or Student Congress would you say you have judged in the past? ​** ** I have judged two rounds of PF 3. Estimating, how many rounds of LD and Policy would you say you have judged in the past? ​** **I have judged for five season of MFA; two Nationals, two Harvard Invitational’s and two CFL's. I had the honor of being a finals judge at the 2008 CFL’s. 4. How heavily do you consider "dropped" arguments? (Arguments that an opponent does not respond to. ** **Feel free to comment)** 5.How important is evidence in your decision ? ** **Ok, lets make one thing clear anecdotes are not evidence. If you are running for office and the old lady is cutting her pills to save money, then the crowd will cheer, that’s an anecdote. For debate it carries no weight. Also polls, they are as empty as GWB’s head, anyone can poll a select group and get any results they want, don’t tell me that recent polls show that 56% of 26 year olds eat Cheetos for breakfast, that’s not an argument and as fact is fraught with so many variable as to make it limp.** 6. Do you prefer: Philosophy Only, Carded Evidence only, No Evidence, Or blends of cards and philosophical concepts? **
 * This depends. In a spread case, where the debater cites many cards to establish the case, some arguments can be dropped without penalty. The focus of the opponent to a spread case is to identify the core or root arguments because spread cases often use variations on a base argument to expand the number of cards. As I judge I will try to sort out the chafe and see what the root arguments are. Attack those root and ignore the chafe. In a more basic case (V,C,3-2 Cont) dropping could be a high risk strategy . Arguments are weighted, some are flimsy, but they may be the ones to tip the scale in a tight round.
 * LD is a philosophy based competition, evidence is what proves your value best reflects the truth in this round.

Like potato chips without salt, a philosophical case without evidence is flat. Evidence is the proof that your philosophy is the truth. Revolutionary France proves that Rousseau got it wrong. So a case without philosophy has no base and without evidence (cards) has no proof. See number five about evidence. We get asked this question at every national competition. My reply is… You are here to convince me your truth is stronger than your opponents. If your presentation is so fast I can’t stay with you, I never hear your truth. Run at the speed you are comfortable with, if fast and clear, I can stay with you (that’s presentation), Great. If you lose me – you lose. **8. On a scale of 1 to 10, how important are formalities for you? (How you refer to your opponent, organization, formal attire, etc.** **Feel free to comment.)** Another 1 to 10, 5 or 6, read further for direction. I have seen debaters who couldn’t keep an empty pencil box organized, but mentally could slice and dice any case. I have heard cases where a debater wore ragged shorts and a t-shirt who left his opponent’s case in a pile of rubble. Dress is good only because the debater’s confidence level is boosted by looking sharp. There is the key; confidence is the root of presenting your case. A dress down debater might need to draw deeper into their self esteem to achieve the level of their opponent. **9. At the end of the day how does a debater win your ballot?** A case is a chain. The value is the anchor, the criteria refine the value, and the contentions verify the criteria which establish the value. This linking is the final level of evaluation I make. An argument that does not address the levels above it is irrelevant, and could be dropped without penalty. **10. Are you a former debater? If yes, what events did you compete in and for how long?** Don’t I wish. My high school debate team was thunder and lightning in those days. They dominated their league, the state and maybe the nationals. In high school I was not worthy enough to shine their shoes. In college, I learned that I could have been on par, but there was no debate program, so I took my energies toward trivial things like civil rights and ending the Vietnam War. We had an open forum debate that was limited by ‘throw no food or fist’ **11. On a scale of 1 to 10, How important are the impacts of the debate to you? (1 being none, 10 being the most important aspect of round. Feel free to comment)** I have trouble scaling impacts. (My guess is 7or 8, maybe 6 or on a rough day 5) They are important. They clarify a case and to some judges decide the outcome, but they are a means not the results. Impacts are the verification of truth, thus the value. Impacts can become the easy way out, that is a risky if you build your case for the impacts. All ultimate impacts are thermonuclear war or Empire. Impacts need to be carefully constructed to serve the role already mentioned. **12. Do you have any "pet peeves" when it comes to debate? If so, what are they?** My ‘pet peeves are the basic ones, rudeness, belittling an opponent and when a debater just doesn’t care. On the third one, just stay home and watch cartoons, you are wasting my time. **13. On a scale of 1 to 10, how detailed are your "flows"? (1 being that you don't flow/don't know what flowing is, 10 being that you are a former policy/lder)** I guess I can’t claim a ten, so I’ll have to settle for an 8. I flow intensely, my flow is unlike any other and honestly the days after is illegible. My focus is on the case; my ‘flow’ makes perfect sense to me and is the basis of my decision. The illegible scope is important. I would hope that it displays the intense focus I apply to your cases and how important your cases are during the round. More than once at the end of the day, I’ll be asked how I decided. I can not recall because soon after I finish the form the focus evaporates. **14. Do you have any preferences? Any things that you like debaters to do? If so, what are they?** **I would like every debater to have their own timer, to keep their own prep time. Years ago some debaters thought they could gain an advantage by cheating on prep time. We have grown up since those days and see such actions as childish.** **When a debater starts her presentation, query the opponent and the judge to confirm we are ready to listen.** **When doing cross-ex do not face your opponent, in any way. You should query the opponent speaking to the judge and responding to the judge. I ask this at the beginning of each round and mention that it avoids the ‘evil eye’. It is a truth; facial reactions can interrupt the logic chain of a line of questions and is an unfair advantage. I know of debaters who with a look could threaten their opponent and that is out-of-bounds.** **15. Cross examination (I know they left this one out, I don’t know why.)** **Cross-X in my book is one of the most exciting parts of the round. No part of cross-x can be weighed unless folded into the case, but it’s potential to change the discourse is substantial. When you prepared your case you most likely considered the case your opponent is presenting, you know its weakness because either you rejected it, or it is your case in another round. You know where you need to defend its weakness. With this knowledge you have the opportunity to extract fatal responses from you opponent, don’t shy away from it, you have a place on your shelf for that trophy; don’t let them take it away because you were timid.** **Don’t ask you opponent to repeat contentions or values, if you didn’t get it because they mumbled or raced through it, let me know… it is likely I had the same problem.(this does require that you do more than twirl your pen while your opponent is speaking) Do your homework. When you walk into the round, you should know your cross-x attack, modified a bit by the early parts of the round.** **Don’t let your opponent answer in flowery, lengthy, time consuming replies, short positive/negative replied should be requested.**
 * 7. What is your preferred speed of delivery(1 being Bill Clinton Slow, 10 being "spreading".** **Feel free to comment)** ?