I am a parent judge with 5+ years of PF/LD/ Policy experience. Please consider me a Flay Judge.

• Speak as fast as you would like, but I will ask you to slow down if I cannot understand. No spreading please. I am fine with 15 seconds of grace time.
• Please be respectful of your opponents and give them a chance to speak. Do not keep interrupting or be rude or condescending. If not, I will drop your speaker points.
• Please do not read any form of progressive argumentation (theory, kritiks, etc.) as I cannot evaluate them and will not give you credit for them.
• Off-time roadmaps and sign-posting are encouraged. It helps me follow your debate better.
• My decision will be based on your contentions, evidence, rebuttals, impacts, summaries and weighing. I will evaluate all those on both sides to come to a decision.
• I like to see well-researched cases backed by strong and credible evidence. Please include me in the email chain to share cards as I like to review them as well.

Good luck and have fun!

I am a former varsity PF debater and Impromptu speaker. I also won the Big Questions Tournament 2022 (as my teammates requested I put in here). I use she/her pronouns. I don't really care about formality (clothes, shoes, setup, whatever, although don't be ridiculous for both our sakes). If you have tech issues, let me know and we can figure it out. Call me dude if you want to, I'll find it fun.

I won't dispute unless you tell me to, be nice, don't make me intervene. I'm fairly flow but I'm also literally a high schooler. Speed is fine, but please organize and signpost well. Have good evidence. Don't be rude. Tech over truth. Theory/K is fine, but needs to be explained thoroughly. Make puns.

I don't have all that much experience in anything other than PF but I have a pretty good gist of the other events.

I only really have one hard and fast rule: don't be a jerk. Otherwise, it's up to y'all to show me what a competent and civil debate looks like.

Good luck :D

Sourabh Goyal

Debate/Politics :
I really enjoy Political discussions or Debate topics.

Points:
I usually start at a 27.0 and work my way up or down from there. Usually you have to be rude or unprepared to dip below the 25.0.

General Info: Treat me like I'm a lay judge. Pretend I haven't debated public forum for 3 years, and that right now, I'm listening to Drake or playing Angry Birds. That being said:

Please don't be toxic or insult your opponents (there's a fine line between mean and dominant).

Please Weigh. I will dock speaks if you say something along the lines of "let's move on to weighing" and don't actually weigh. It's annoying. Remember--weighing is comparing the two impacts.

Have your cards ready. If I feel like you're taking too long to find a card or the card is cut blatantly incorrectly, I will drop the card from the round. Let me repeat myself. I will drop your card. Do not waste my time or your opponent's time.

Signpost. If I don't know where you are, I won't be able to flow your argument comprehensively. That's on you. It's worth the extra five seconds to say "Now, five responses on their second contention."

Speed: As far as speed, I'm pretty much fine with anything under 1000 wpm. I prefer slower and more logical responses that are easy to follow, but I will not dock points for going too fast.

Speaks: I love jokes, analogies, and puns, so those may/may not bump up your speaks (make sure to focus on the round first and foremost, however). Or, do the billy bounce for at least 30 seconds during a speech. I've tried. It's hard. If you do push-ups during your speech, I will give you plus one speaker point for every push-up (90 degrees, tricep pushups).

I hope you have a fun/educational/worthwhile round!

P.S. I am open to theory. Not some dumb [censored] like "shoe theory". What the heck even is that? If you run theory, make it legit.

I've judged parli for several years now.

Please enunciate and speak slower. Especially with debates online, sometimes I struggle to hear speeches properly when someone is talking fast.

Make sure you have logical arguments with clear reasoning that I can flow.

Do not try to run theory or kritiks.

I encourage POIs

(he/him)

I've debated public forums for a few years, as both a first and a second speaker.

I'm generally tech>truth and tabula rasa, but you'll get dropped if you try to convince me that racism is good or something of that absurdity.

Spreading:

Public Forum is not for spreading. I don't mind speed, but remember quality of arguments > quantity of arguments. If I stop typing or writing in the middle of your speech, it means that you're going too fast for me to flow and those arguments are going to be lost forever. Take it as a sign to slow down.

I'm more lenient about speed in LD or policy as long as I have a copy of your case to follow.

Framework/Impact Weighing:

Make sure you set a framework so I know what to vote on (if you don't have a framework but your opponents do, guess whose framework I'll use). Basically, tell me why I should vote for you over the opponent. Tell me why your impacts matter more than your opponents'. Impacts should be terminalized, and voters should be explicitly outlined in the back half.

Evidence:

Evidence should be read according to NSDA rules (last name, date). Be prepared for me or your opponents to call for a piece of evidence (either have the card cut or the link ready). I don't usually call for cards unless it's pivotal in my decision or if it's a pretty serious clash of cards. ALSO, simply reading me a link without warranting is not going to be enough to get any offense. Warrant the card, tell me why it matters, and explain its relevance to the resolution.

Theory:

I know very basic theory, so if you choose to run it, make sure to explain clearly what you are arguing. Also make sure your opponents know enough to respond to theory. If you run theory against a team who has no idea what theory is, I'll drop the arg.

Speaker Points:

Speaks start at 27.5 and move up or down from there based on how you act during round, regardless of whether you win or lose. Articulate your points loudly and clearly. Be respectful to your opponents, not rude. Please, please, please signpost your second half speeches.

CrossX:

I do not judge off crossX, but I do listen. Please remember that cross is for questions about the other team's speeches. Addressing me (the judge) in the middle of crossX or trying to give a speech during crossX is the fastest and easiest way to lose speaks.

Counterplans:

I don't mind counterplans in LD or policy as long as the aff reads a plan beforehand. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense for you to provide a counterplan to a nonexistent plan. Counterplans in PF are a no-no move and will not be flowed.

PF Specific:

New arguments or evidence brought up in second summary or final focus will not be evaluated. Defense should be extended through second summary, and anything that I don't flow from summary won't be flowed into final focus.

Other Stuff:

If there's anything you are unsure about (either on judging preference or anything), I'd be happy to clarify before round starts.

Also look at Yvo Sandjideh's paradigm here. She's kinda cool and it has a lot of content and standards that I agree with.

I am fairly new judge. I pay attention to what each team is saying, slowing down will help me.

Points for you:

- point for you if you have good arguments, of course

- if your opponent does not have good rebuttal for your argument

- if you can summarize coherently at the end what your opponent missed to rebut

Hey yall, I'm Yvo (she/her)! I'm a current PF debater and I'm also a coach for middle schoolers.

Update for 2020-2021

Don't break COVID guidelines to debate with your partner. It's dangerous, unfair, and generally a bad move. I'm going to vote on 6 feet theory pretty easily.

Speaker points

My usual score for a relatively clear, effective speaker is a 28. Signpost, especially for first speakers. Be clear, loud, and concise, and you'll be good. If you're excessively rude, cursing people out, racist/sexist/transphobic/anything, you will be dropped. I've never given below a 27, but I will go as low as possible for offensive speech.

How to get 30 speaks

I play fast and loose with speaker points, i.e. they don't matter to me, so why not have fun! There are lots of ways to get 30s from me, but here's a short list:

- Puns (the worse the better)

- Snacks! (no pressure on this one)

- Incorporate the first line of "All Star" by Smash Mouth into your rebuttal or summary in a way that makes sense

- Clearly reference a TV show, movie, musical, or singer (list of things I'm a fan of is at the bottom)

- Rap your summary or FF

Spreading (anything over like 800 words)

I'm in high school, I'm perpetually sleep deprived, and I'm a slow writer. Don't spread.

Crossfire

I'll listen to your cross, but I won't judge off of it if you don't bring up damning points in your speech. You don't have the obligation to respond to anything brought up in cross during your next speech unless they extend it through their speech.

I do absolutely notice when yall are cutting off your opponents and not letting them answer. I will not hesitate to drop your speaks, even if you win the round. This is mostly for the toxic male debaters but I'm equal opportunity on this one.

BE RESPECTFUL!!! Don't yell, cut each other off, or be rude. Don't try to make your opponents look stupid. If you've got the answer/info you need, back off.

Arguments

Run whatever you want. As long as it makes sense, isn't overtly offensive or problematic, I'm good with it. Explain your links well, make sure your arguments are unique, and talk about your impacts in all your speeches. I'll call for cards at the end if I think I need to, or if one team has a serious request for it. I don't want to vote for an argument I don't understand, so rare args need a good logical flow to it. Be clear on uniqueness.

I like moral arguments over big stick impacts, as long as there's evidence for it. So prioritizing impacts for certain populations that aren't prioritized for traditional debates.

Theory/Ks

I'm good with it, but keep in mind the skill of your opponents. Don't be abusive. I'll still judge on frivolous theory, but please note I hate disclosure theory and think it's a waste of time. I prefer theory related to issues I can solve in the round (ie, dropping the debater fixes the problem).

I'm not as familiar with Ks as I am with theory, so just explain the argument well. Same goes here, I prefer issues that can be solved in round.

Links

Make sure they're logical, explained clearly, and not dropped in later speeches. You must win the link-level debate before I'll even consider your impacts. That is, if your opponent turns you or delinks you, explain why they're wrong before jumping to "we outweigh."

Impacts

Please do good, clear weighing. Tell me why your impact is better/worse than theirs. Tell me why poverty is more important than the economy. Even if it seems clear why your impacts outweigh, you still have to explain it. Card your impacts.

Other Stuff

Second rebuttal should frontline, but second summary can bring up new frontlines. If second summary does new frontlines, then they can't complain if first ff addresses those.

Defense isn't sticky or terminal. If you read a turn on them and then don't bring it up in summary, I assume you concede it and they don't have to respond to it anymore.

Case doesn't need to be extended in rebuttals, but it does have to be fully extended in summary or I drop whatever you don't read.

I try not to intervene as much as possible since the round should speak for itself. However, if I feel like it's needed or I just have to (for very messy debates), I'll note it in the RFD and explain why.

If you ask, I'll probably disclose if you give me a minute to collect my thoughts. I'll always submit my ballot before disclosing, so if you get argumentative it won't fix anything.

Welcome to the part where I tell you all my favorite TV shows and stuff:

The Office, Parks & Rec, Brooklyn 99, Good Place, Umbrella Academy, anything from the MCU, Kim's Convenience, Hamilton, Dear Evan Hansen, anything from Harry Potter (books or movies), Real Genius, Some Kind of Wonderful, Yuri on Ice, Skam, the Politician, Feel Good, Great British Baking Show, She-ra, Conan Gray, Carry On (30s for the whole team if you do this one)

I'm a former varsity PF debater from Los Altos High School, CA and current college student.

Read the entire paradigm, please! This is also a paradigm aimed towards PF, so if this isn't a PF round, ask me for a verbal paradigm beforehand.

- Virtual Debate Stuffs

Email: shah.aman.a@gmail.com

Please add me to the email chain or evidence sharing document.

Cameras: Unless you are having a tech issue, I expect cameras to be on.

Tech Issues: If either you or I have tech issues and I miss part of your speech, we will do our best to determine how much extra time you would need and I will allow you to repeat that section of the speech.

- Please don't ask me when you want to take prep. Tell me. Claim your prep with confidence because it's YOURS.

- Absolutely NO SPREADING at any point!! Your speaks will sink like the Lusitania (If you do not know what the Lusitania is, shame on you). I need to understand what you're saying. I am also a sleep-deprived student who does not have the mental capacity to be flowing a round where you are spreading (speed-reading). Also, Zoom audio is not conducive to spreading, so don't shoot yourself in the foot.

- You must SIGNPOST! It is totally okay for you to use off-time roadmaps and I encourage them. Please also signpost during your rebuttals and summaries especially to make sure I know what to flow and where to extend my flow. Also, number your responses!

- Please debate a PF Round: No kritiks, theory, counter-plans, etc. It's Public Forum, not Policy or Parli.

- Crossfire: I will listen to Crossfire and it will count towards speaker points. Please do not demean your opponents in any way, shape, or form. Just answer questions concisely and to the point. Please also make sure that you give your opponent equal time during crossfire. Be kind and fair! Allowing others to have questions, respecting their time, etc. will exponentially help your speaks. Also, anything you say in cross that you want me to be flowing as part of the debate must be in your speeches.

- Weighing: Super important! Make sure to compare both worlds in summaries and spend time weighing in final focus as well. This is a main portion of how I will decide the round, so if you do not weigh, it will be an automatic win for the other team. Mention voter issues! Why should I give the ballot to you?

- Framework/Standard: For PF, I will automatically assume that its net benefits. For all other debate events, you tell me.

- Kindness: You need to be kind to your opponents. Do not be condescending towards your opponents or call their arguments silly, etc. I will call you out and tank your speaker points. Debate requires a certain decorum and if you cannot follow that, debate is not for you.

- Jargon: Please explain technical terms in your speeches to both me and your opponents, to a reasonable extent. I have not prepped this topic, and am NOT knowledgeable on this topic, so please do define obscure jargon/names of programs in your speeches, otherwise the point will be lost on the flow and I will not extend it.

- Arguments: You can run basically anything as long as it is not offensive in any way (racist, sexist, etc.). Please warrant your evidence! Although it is technically okay to bring up new evidence/arguments in second summary, just don't. Debate etiquette exists and it's really crappy to bring up new arguments in second summary. It could affect your speaks in a negative way.

- Speaking Point Method: My standard speaking points will start at 27.5.

Speaks will go down if you use a lot of filler words (like, um, uh, etc.) or go over/under time (It is fine if you are within 10 seconds of the time limit on either side).

Speaks will go down more if you go over time than if you are under the time limit (especially with 3 minute summaries). Your speaks will go up if you show exemplary sportsmanship and are nice but firm during crossfire/cross-ex.

If you get 30 speaks from me, it means I believe you have descended as a deity (of whatever belief you may subscribe to) and speak like an angel.

Please ask me if you do not understand something in my paradigm or need some more clarification! Good luck!

If you need clarification regarding your RFD, please email me. If you are argumentative with me about my round decision and RFD, I will ignore you. So don't argue.

I employ a simple rubric when judging: (a) logical reasoning (b) strong evidence (c) effective rebuttal/refuting of opponent's claims (d) strong clash (e) clear articulation of argument and (e) respect. I'm a relatively inexperienced judge, so I'll ask debaters to inform me if I'm missing something regarding technicalities/protocol or could be doing something to enable a better debate.

Lynbrook '21 qualled to TOC, captain my senior year.

run crazy stuffffffff i like squirrely arguments (theory, Ks, nuke war good) - debates boring

note: if im judging u in the morning im probably extremely tired. pls adjust accordingly :))

namansinghal101@gmail.com

im not that well versed in the topic yet for palm classic: have not heard a single round on the topic

Conflicts: Potomac, Lynbrook

tech > truth

prog

go for it

ask questions in round if ur unsure

speaks

make smart, strategic choices and youll get good speaks

if u buy me coffee auto 30

note: try not to be aggro (i don't care about cross anyways)

skip gcx if u please, but im only willing to make it 1 min of prep (not 3)

Hi. I'm a varsity PF debater. For this tournament, treat me like a lay judge (ie: I'll take notes but I won't flow, and I won't follow spreading). That said I do have some likes and dislikes.

1) SIGNPOST - Seriously, signpost. Otherwise, I'm gonna be really confused

2) Be polite - You don't have to be best buds with you're opponents, but don't be mean. That will definitely get you 25 speaks

3) Low-speaks wins - I'm pretty open to giving low-speaks wins (where the losing team has higher speaks).

4) If you want to win the round, I need you to do a good job explaining why you win. Make sure to weigh, and crystalize the round (that means boil down the details of the round into clear big ideas that I can vote off of).

I've judged LD once and parli never, so if I'm judging you in those events, please be clear and explain all terminology

I have been a judging PF from 2018 onwards. I have judged varied tournaments from Novice to Varsity levels.

Present your story clearly.  My preference will be clarity over ambiguity.

I don't mind if you speak fast.

I also weigh based on maturity of the thought, clear communication and metrics relating to your argument

I am a lay judge, being a public forum judge for about 1.5 years. So please speak slowly and clearly (<200 wpm). If I can't understand you, I can't vote for you. I will look for a clear explanation of the arguments. If you signpost clearly during your speech, that will be great. Please run less run any progressive arguments but try to focus on debating the topic. Please use little debate jargon (such as de-link and terminal defense, etc.) but use simple terms. And most of all have fun!

I like when debaters respond to the specific warrants of their opponent's arguments/evidence. I see debaters respond to their opponent's case by reading many cards but without spending much time explaining the interaction between the new cards being read and the cards that are being responded to. I'd rather you read fewer responses and instead spend more time telling me why the answers you're making are better or more likely to be true than the original argument. I really like it when debaters isolate the warrant in their opponent's argument, isolate the warrant in their own response, and compare the two.

Slow down. Please pause between the tag of an argument, the author name, and the body of your card, as well as between individual cards. I have problems flowing the debate when there are no pauses.

I am not as well-read or well-informed as professional debate judges. I don't do as much background reading or as much topic-specific prep as I should. If I am your judge, please over-explain your arguments (though by over-explain, I don't mean repeat yourself).

For the last two speeches, make sure you prioritize weighing your arguments (both the size of the link and the size of the impact) and respond to your opponents' weighing.