Interp

Debate: I appreciate proper pronunciation and enunciation. Stay on topic. Please don't pathos me and don't spread. I don't like it. Clear and concise arguments. I can't judge properly if I have to spend half of your speaking time writing your points down.

The isms (racism, sexism, able-ism, etc.) have very specific roles in debate. Use them WISELY. Don't be contrary for the sake of being contrary.

Interp: Interp is meant to be entertaining while sending a message. Please do both.

Limited Prep: I don't expect you to be experts about your topics, but I do expect you to be informed.

My paradigm is that I don't believe in one. This is your round, I am open to any argument, which means that you frame and tell me how to weigh the round. Speed is fine. Do you, basically. If you have more specific questions feel free to ask!

Head coach at Plano East Senior High.

I enjoy judging IEs most.
In Extemp: at TFA State I will be randomly source checking 1 source per speech, let’s not be making up our sources plz

In LD, I’ve gotten much more progressive, but I tend to still favor traditional.

-I do not like Kritiks; they are generic and lazy debating - I will not vote for them. If you can run the same K all year on all the topics, that's a problem.

-On case attacks are important!

-Theory & CPs good.

-Do not read at me while giving voters.

-2AR does not necessarily have to be line-by-line.

-I understand spreading, but if you become unclear I will say "clear" once, and after that, if you do not clear your speaking, I will stop flowing, more than likely hurting your chances. 7/10 speed please. Slow down on tags please.

In PF, I’m traditional. I don’t like spreading in PF and there should definitely not be CPs, Theory, Kritiks, or anything like that.

In Policy, pretty much the same as LD above, except I have more tolerance for Ks in Policy because it is a year long topic and you have more time to read lit. I have a lot less experience in Policy than the other debate events, but I have some competitive UIL CX history and can cross apply progressive LD knowledge.

In all debates: I do not tolerate rudeness - especially in cx/crossfire. I love seeing passion in rounds, but being passionate about your topic does not mean you get to be rude. Excessive rudeness/terrible attitude results in lowest speaks possible.

Include me in on email chains: madison.gackenbach@pisd.edu

I look forward to hearing you speak!

LD Debate: I am a judge that leans toward the classic style. I don't mind K-debate, but you'd better make it apply to the resolution! I am not a fan Topicality arguments. If you run more than one off, I'm not going to apply the rest. Don't be a whiny debater. Debate the round! Speed is fine as long as you are articulate. Don't be rude to your opponent, and if you are a male debater...DON'T BE SEXIST OR CONDESCENDING to a female opponent. I want to hear framework, value, criterion, impacts, and links. Give me that and I will be happy.

PF Debate: Framework and Impacts! I don't like rudeness in Cross Examination. I like a mix of claims, warrants, and narrative. Tell me a story. I am not looking for solvency. I'm not sure why people think they have to solve in PF. I just want to understand why you support or oppose the status quo, how that fits into the framework provided, and where/how it impacts. Don't make it too difficult.

Speech and Interp: I enjoy being in speech and interp rounds, where I get to see student's personalities take flight! I love stories, and I feel like the journey's students choose to take us on are important ones!

In interp, I look for HONESTY and connection in each performance. Don't force emotion. We see that! It takes us out of the context of the piece! Also, please don't stare directly at me. I can't get lost in your piece if you are including me in the scene. I want to be a fly on the wall. And I'm a big believer in the FOURTH WALL. Also, I'm not a fan of those who exploit special needs characters, or make fun of them. If you use the "R" word in my round, or show disrespect to special needs characters, you will hear about it on my ballot. Please reconsider doing this in any piece you choose. It is exclusive and disturbing...don't resort to such things for the purpose of a trophy. This community encourages you to find growth in your humanity as well as your talents!

In speech, I like it when I learn something I didn't already know. Teach me! I love coming out of rounds and telling people, "I was in this OO/Informative/Extemp round and I just learned that..." And I don't mind controversial subjects either! As long as you aren't excluding anyone, or being offensive to a particular group of people (race, ability, religion, sexual preference...etc), then I'm okay with controversy. And whatever your topic...have conviction!

In both speech AND interp, I like it when students make CHOICES and take CHANCES. I'm a tough judge, but only because I want you to improve and have the best critique you can get to do that! I love the community that speech and debate provides for students. I also know that the experience I get from every single performer is invaluable! So thank you!

I am a parent lay judge.

I will make an effort to flow - go slower to help me.

You should probably read your lay/stock cases in front of me - they are just more believable and I am a lay judge.

If you explain things well, I will vote for them. I tend to prefer more believable but still important/large impacts.

You should compare your impacts and arguments to your opponents and clearly prove why yours are better.

Don't be rude, lie, or cheat.

Speaks are dependent on how easily I was able to follow you not just in terms of speech, but how you explained arguments.

I'll try to disclose the result with a very very short RFD.

Hello Debaters:

I am a parent judge. My son does Policy Debate. Please keep the following things in mind:

1. Do not use any jargon. I may not be able to understand it.

2. Please speak at normal speed or else I may miss your arguments, especially when you are citing source information and citations. I will not give you a signal to slow down.

3. Assume that I know nothing about the topic. This is the only way that I can be fair and impartial. Otherwise, because I likely already have an opinion on the resolution, I would only ever vote for one side.

4. Above all, be kind to your opponents!

Speaker poit scale:

30=Superb

29=Competent

28=Adequate

27=Needs Work

<27=Unethical or Rude

General Debate: I follow clear line-by-line arguments, I should not have to work hard to follow your arguments or understand what you are trying to prove. Clear extensions with solid analysis will win the round, but being rude won’t. If your plan to win is to interrupt your opponents you are going to have a tough time. I'm good with speed, just slow down in tags, dates, and authors. Just because it’s on your doc doesn’t mean you read it. If you set up an email chain my email is alyson.spencer@kellerisd.net. I have experience competing and judging in LD, CX, and PF so I know how the game is played. Let me know if you have any questions.

Case: Clear arguments that are well laid out are the way to go. I prefer the quality over quantity. Your goal should be to win because you have a better case not smother your opponent in arguments.
T: This is important. I don’t care how much of a positive impact comes from your case, if it doesn’t link in it will not win. Proving this sooner rather than later is key.
DAs and CPs: Do it, I’m game.
Ks and KAff: Prove that it is true and relevant and you got it.
Theory: I don’t buy theories that waste my time. If you are going to run a theory make it worth my time and energy.

Hello!

If you're viewing this page, I'm most likely going to be your judge for a Speech/Interp Round, and my paradigm is located below!

Firstly, I'm a national qualifier in this event, and a 2018 National Qualifier. I have major respect for this event and have few things to mention before you go off into round

I'm going to be incredible honest with you I.E. events are my favorite events and have little to no paradigm. You've already made your pieces and there's no way you can adapt to what I like 5 minutes before the round. I'll judge your piece like it is. These paradigms are for after

- If I happen to judge you and leave comments, use them to your advantage!! One thing I HATE seeing is someone who I'm judging for a second time only to see the exact same performance. USE WHAT THE JUDGES SUGGEST FOR YOU AND ADAPT!!

- Last thing: Speech and Interp is a forum and a platform to all types of voices. Any discriminatory/sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic (etc.) types of language and rhetoric will result in me, simply, not listening, and this may (and probably will) result in a ranking of dead last, accompanied with a talking-to with me about correcting such behavior. Just avoid it. Don't try to exploit the matters to seem edgy or explosive especially if you have not specifically researched the topic thoroughly and care about the topic and those affected by it.

- Speech/interp is amazing!! Have fun!!

PF/LD

- really simple here: DON'T TURN THE ROUND INTO A SCREAMING MATCH. i understand that in debate you have to attack your opponent and advocate for your side but still be respectful to your opponent and to my ears.

- I consider myself more "tabula rosa" and will flow and evaluate what is presented to me; this means: offer some framework for me, carefully quantify your impacts, and etc.; tell me how i ought to judge this round !!

- comments about being respectful of the debate space apply here from what i mentioned from speech/interp above

- Any form of argumentation is fine as long as it is warranted and you can clearly explain it. This includes T, plans, and counterplans. However, I am not familiar with critical arguments, so run Ks at your demise. (also, if i don't understand your DA, CP, etc, and its obvious, that's on you)

- I would strongly encourage you to disclose arguments before round and even add me to an email chain. How much or how little you disclose is up to you and your opponent. You can ask for my email in round. If you choose not to, I may request full access to any pieces of evidence at any time

- For speaking speed, still go a little slower. If you're fast and I don't understand and I can't flow, it's your loss

- Have fun !!

Congress

- not many things to mention, but watch "when" you place your speeches

- I expect the first quarter of the debate to have contention args and speeches that sound like a sponsorship, after that, please focus on a more rebuttal speech!

- Disrespectful PO's are NOT the move

- Super new in Congress so if i ask questions don't be rude about it.

Exempt: FX and DX

- Make sure your hand motions are not super distracting. Some motions are okay and if they make sense but if they are all over the place then I definitely will use it against you when i think about your rank. Same with leg movement when standing in place don't sway or move around unless it's to move to your next point.

- On my ballots i usually write down your argument so i can keep up with your reasoning and write any disputes i have. So if i just write what you said either i didn't get much from it or it didn't need any work.

-Clearly state and cite you're sources so your argument has merit also provide framework/ road map to your speeches

- I'm sort of new in exempt so for the most part my comments will be more speech based since that's what I'm used to. But that doesn't mean i can't tell when you're not doing your best or doing something wrong

- Don't stand there and yell your argument at me

- Do people spread in exempt? Don't in mine please!!!

- Make it interesting ad in a saying or a joke or two to keep your judged invested and interested.

Overall in a pretty fair judge in general and if you have problems I encourage you to talk to me about it

DEBATE: Competed in LD for the last three years of High School (graduated 2019). I am comfortable with whatever argumentation that you'd like. But if you speed, I prefer that you either slow down on taglines or add me to the email chain (allygperkins@gmail.com). Because it's LD, provide some sort of framework or adapt to your opponent's so I know what to vote on in order for you to be able to access your impacts. I generally tend to go with tech over truth, except in the case of racism, sexism, xenophobia, etc...

***Debate was such a fun time in my life when in high school, but I know how stressful it can be. That said, enjoy yourself and have fun. One way we can do that is to make sure that we are inclusive and accessible to all. I find that some debaters believe that cross-x is a time to "flex" and assert dominance/privilege. Condescending mansplaining, consistent interruptions of your opponent, or otherwise aggressive behavior will not be accepted, either resulting in a loss (at a maximum) or a decimation of speaks (at a minimum). Debate is cool, but it's not important enough to do anything that makes people feel unsafe/uncomfortable.***

SPEECH: I competed in poetry, prose, OO, and info off and on for four years of high school (again, graduated in 2019)

In interp events, I look for a compelling story line, well developed characterization, clear and concise teaser/intro, and ultimately dedication to the story telling

In platform and limited prep, I look for confidence, time allocation, speech structure, and enjoy humour in the right context.

Ultimately, speech events are all about what you make of them and I am just here to watch you use your platform to discuss subjects that are important to you!

Typically the biggest issue I face as a judge is teams refuse to actually respond to or weigh arguments/impacts. Other than basic things like topicality, etc. I'm likely to vote for whichever team is able to resolve conflicting arguments related to links or impacts by addressing and dismantling or outweighing their opponent's (rather than simply re-reading evidence/extending through the ink)

I tend to include performance, diction, voice, energy, etc. in my evaluation for events like oratory, info, and extemp, along with the obvious analysis of content, ideas, and supporting material.

I think creativity in blocking and staging should be rewarded in a digital atmosphere as much as they are in a live one.

I am pretty liberal on content - language, sexuality, etc. do not bother or offend me, as long as the performer has a real grasp on the subjects they are talking about and understands them fully. However, I view 'profanity' much differently than slurs, derogatory language, etc. In general I would prefer that they not be used. There are scripts that use them in order to bring home a point about the vileness of such ideas and beliefs, but in my opinion, that must be very earned, and in most cases, it is not.

CX Judge

Tab/Stock judge. I'm generally fine with judging anything. However, I am not a huge fan of counterplans. I'm good with Disadvantages, Topicality, Theory, and Ks if they are linked and unique to the plans/arguments at hand. Take topicality seriously--it really needs to be a valid and compelling.

The Affirmative needs to uphold all stock issues, and I will weigh the advantages/disadvantages. New evidence to support already discussed arguments in 2nd Negative Constructive is fine, but new arguments in 2NC is abusive in my opinion.

Clash is super important--if there is none I'll rely more on speaker points.

I hate spreading--I'm fine with reasonable speed, but debate is also about speaking well--at the very least explain your cards more slowly in your own words if you spread to read them.

Debate is about making a good case, speaking well, linking valid points and clash. You need to tell me why your argument or plan is important! Do not get into the weeds about random points that don't play into the overarching argument.

Coaching History:

Mansfield Legacy [2023-Present]
Byron Nelson High School (2018-2021)
Royse City High School (2013-2018; 2021-2023)
Email: matthewstewart@misdmail.org (do please include me in any email chains)

General Preferences [updated as of 3/14/24]:

Theory
More truth over tech. If you're real big on theory, I'm not your judge because I'm definitely gonna goof up that flow.

Disclosure:

Don't run it. I think open source is good and should be the standard, but I don't care for it being used as an argument to smash small schools without prep.

Framework:
Default offense/defense if I don't have a framework to work with. Winning framing doesn't mean you win the round, you still need to leverage it for your offense.


Speed:
Whatever you AND your opponent are okay with! Speed shouldn't be a barrier to debate. Slow up for Taglines/Cites, give me a filler word ("and," "next," etc.) to let me know when you're moving to the next piece on the flow and be sure to give me some pen time on Theory/Topicality shells.

Round Conduct:
Don't be sketchy, rude, or hostile to judges or your opponents! We're all here to learn and grow academically, remember that.

Speaker Points:
Starts at 27 and goes up based on strategy, delivery style, and round conduct. Sub 27 means you most likely said something unabashedly offensive or were just generally hostile towards your opponents.

Miscellaneous Stuff

-Debate what you want to debate, I would rather try to meet you on your side of what debate is rather than enforce norms on you. BUT that doesn't mean you can get away with making unwarranted arguments or not doing extensions, impacts, or weighing like a good debater should!

-Open CX and Flex prep are cool with me, but I will respect the norms of the circuit I am judging in.

-I'm pretty non-verbal as I'm flowing and listening, so for better or worse that's gonna be there.

-Just be chill. Debate the way that is most comfortable for you...hopefully that isn't a really yelly and rude style because I'd prefer you not. Respect each other, do your thing, and we'll all have a good time!

-A roadmap is just telling me what order to put my flowsheets in. No more. No less.

-Be kind to novices, be the support you wish you had when you first started. Bonus points for treating newbies nice.

-Extending specific warrants WITH your cards is good, so is doing evidence comparison and impacting out drops

-The less work you do on telling me how to evaluate the round, the riskier it gets for your ballot. Don't assume we're both on the same flow page or that I can read your mind.

-Sending the doc or speech is part of prep time. I will not stop prep until the doc is sent.

I will be looking for well structured arguments and also good delivery.

I like to judge all events. Spreading is okay if it’s easy to follow. I am very up to date with news and current political issues as well as world events. I will usually give feedback after the speeches or events.

alexvaughn389@gmail.com

Wylie High School (2015-2019)

UT Dallas (2019-2022)

he/him

I am rewriting this because why not.

CX - I rarely judge but if i happen to default to my LD paradigm

LD - I rarely judge but have experience. I consider myself a tab judge so give me a framework to evaluate the round and emphasize that over the course of the debate. I urge you to stray away from progressive debate tactics (like K's, T, etc.), mainly bc most debaters in LD can not run them properly or respond to them properly, and it makes for bad debate. Sorry. That being said, I am competent at evaluating any round of LD and any type of argument as long as you can explain it well.

PF - I judge this the most. Please know that blatant PF "toxic disrespect" is an automatic loss and 25 speaks. Make sure that you are always respectful to your opponents and have healthy discourse. Also, there seems to be a trend where people waste time by asking and begging to flash a certain card that ends up not mattering or teams taking too long to respond when people want to see the evidence. Please know that this will not happen in any of my rounds. I will immediately intervene and decide for myself, and then talk to your coaches because it is ridiculous. It should take no more than 20 seconds to find and flash a card, albeit email it, and any longer or other abuse of time theft will result in my intervention. Aside from that, I can evaluate any arguments, including DAs and T, but be sure that your opponent knows how to respond to them, otherwise its an awkward debate. Be sure to give voters.TLDR: don't be ridiculous, be respectful, give voters, and give good debate.

Congress - Just know that the person that gets my one will likely not have all of their speeches prewritten. Rather, they take what their opponents say and craft a speech mid round to give rebuttal arguments and constructive debate. Also, they actively participate on every bill. For the PO, as long as you know the basics it's fine and you will likely be ranked well, you can ask for help whenever.

Extemp - Make sure you answer the question. I have ranked the best speeches last because they simply don't answer the question word for word as it appears. I don't want that to happen to you :(

IE/whatever else - Give TW's if you discuss sensitive material. That's it just do you.

IE Performances

Performance material should be literature that is compelling and unique. It should be evident that the story fits the performer. Organization of structure and character arc should be evident. Multiple characters are a plus for me but the most important aspect is that the character/s you create are believable. Strong choices but nothing for mere shock value. (Do not prefer cursing, cuss words...but will overlook if proven appropriate for the piece) Time should be used well. As an audience member you should be respectful and appropriate when watching other competitors- just as important. New material is a plus. Motivated blocking. Clean transitions, variation in tone and pacing. Clear articulation.

Speech Events: IX, DX, INFO, OO

Debate