Of the many things which are important to a student's performance, the ballot determines who advances in forensics competition and, ideally, offers a rationale for why some are successful and others are not. This paper aims to lay out guidelines for inexperienced judges and new coaches in writing a proper oral interpretation ballot. The paper also looks at past studies to see what other scholars have discovered in terms of oral interpretation adjudication. It offers a judge's taxonomy for oral interpretation, contending that there are five areas that a judge should pay attention to on the ballot: literature, physical delivery, characterization, vocalization, and technique. (Contains 13 references.) (NKA)