Hello Debaters,

My name is Nida, and I am a parent judge. In debate I look for a few main things.

1. Clear speech and articulation. If I can't hear your points, I won't be judging on them
2. Respectful and healthy debate. "You may disapprove or disagree with your opponent, but you will defend their right to speech"
3. Overall good contentions. This is something I automatically look for, and I hope that this point can be a given

And overall, have fun! I look forward to intellectual and respectful debate.

Ley judge. Keep spreading to a minimum, avoid IVI's, theory, etc. If I can't understand your argument, you won't get my ballot.

Clearly explain link chains and which impacts you are collapsing on.

Weigh clearly, help me see the impact your side presents.

Be respectful to your opponents, and enjoy the Debate.

I am not a lay judge. I participated in speech and debate when I was in high school. I qualified for nationals in both NSDA and CFL for Lincoln Douglas debate. Flow judge. I also participated in extemporaneous speech as a double entry at the national tournament. I have done congress (which were done on Friday nights before main tournaments on Saturday), impromptu, policy, and an abandoned category called Group Discussion.

In dramatic events I like to see a wide range of emotions and voices. I also like to see times close to perfect and great audience engagement. Your characters must be clear and unique and I need to see the scene you are conveying to the audience.

Do not shake my hand after a round.

General

Respect your judges and competitors.

Follow the rules, as I read them and will ask Tab staff if there are any issues.

Be timely to your round.

Debate

I judge mostly on the content you provide and how you approach your opponent's speeches. However, your delivery is important in order for me to hear and understand you. I do flow the debates and will use my flow to do a majority of my own deliberation. Please use signposts, it will make it far easier for me to focus on your content, rather than where you are in your speech. I will prioritize certain points if you provide evidence or backing as to why they should be prioritized.

DO NOT SPREAD! I will not be able to keep up, it will not be an instant loss, but your points are far more likely to slip off (or not even appear) on my flow.

If you are to use theory, rather than evidence, please make sure you have adequate support as to why I should care (it’s the same for the vice versa). You may discuss general points, but show me impact. No non-topical kritiks.

For LD, your CV and VC are incredibly important as to why you win. However, you can win through other means if the values and criteria are a wash.

Online: Normally I would use a check and x system on my ballots. But due to online functionality, I will use :) and :( .

Congress

I judge your score based on a combination of how well it is written, the content of the speech, the delivery of the speech, and how it applies based on what has happened thus far in the chamber. I will rank you based on your scores, your questioning, and what your impact was on the chamber.

I want to see rebuttals and new content.

I do not want to see repetitious points or speeches with all words, no content.

I want questions that influence the flow of debate.

I don’t want gotcha questions that are only for making your opponent look bad (If it otherwise influences debate it is okay, but don’t do it maliciously).

Some level of purposeful blocking and vocal inflections during your speech would be recommended.

Speech

I will judge you based on a combination of vocality, movement, and content (these will weigh differently based on your respective event [this is not to say the ones weighed lower are unimportant]).

Please stand out in your event, it will make you more memorable when I am ranking you. Do not be monotone or use minimal blocking. Appropriate vocal pacing and emphasis are key to making it high on my ballot.

Please be respectful of other speakers, when they are presenting. Please stay attentive (or at least act like it). I know many of you will see the same script up to 4 times a day, but remember you want your judge and audience to give you attention, so do the same for them.

Your event has recommended guidelines for the judge, but they are also for you. Make sure you excel in each of them and you are more likely to rank higher. If you are unable to locate this, please read your league’s website or ask your coach, not your judge.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Good luck and have fun! :-D

Follow the rules of competition

Respect the other side and all team members and their position on topic.

Track your time

Speak Clearly

To all competitors

About me: I have an engineering background with a bachelor's degree from FIU and a master's degree in Engineering Management from FIU. I pay attention to flow and supporting data behind each contention and rebuttals

Please speak clearly. I prefer not to have off the clock road mapping.  I am not trained in spreading. If you choose to use this technique and I cannot understand you, I will not be able to judge appropriately.  Do your best, maintain good eye contact and be respectful throughout the debate.  Most importantly, enjoy the debate

I have been judging since the beginning of the 2021-2022 school year. I have judged both Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum Debates as part of the Florida Gulf Coast Catholic Forensics League. I have judged in local and regional events including 8 in-person tournaments and 1 online tournament. I had the privilege of judging the Final Round of the National Lincoln-Douglas Debate last year. I do not like spreading. If I can not understand an argument, then I can not give credit to the points of that argument.

I feel that a few well-developed arguments prove more persuasive than a larger quantity of arguments. In addition, arguments should each be addressed individually.

Rebuttals should provide voters answers to address the important issues advanced in constructive speeches. Rebuttals should also extend arguments individually which debaters advanced in constructive speeches.

Citations after article introduction are preferred.

Oral prompting won't affect my decisions.

Build the value that is not overly complicated and should be relatable, and criterion should not be over technical.

I prefer empirical arguments over philosophical and theoretical to support a value position.

Critical arguments should provide substantial evidence for their support.

Debaters should make sure that all claims are supported with specific, defined examples with no paraphrasing.

Off case arguments should have a purpose or illustration for the case at hand.

The focus should be winning the debate, not just attacking a person's style or flaws of method. Winning on technicalities is not winning a debate.

Remember that in order to win a round, respect towards your opponent is paramount. It is hard to find in favor of debaters who belittle or berate their opponent in or out of round. Graceful winners are as important as graceful losers.

I vote off the flow. I don't mind debate jargon, but I may ask you to clarify some terms. Don't spread or talk too fast (200 wpm is the max where I can still catch everything you say). I will ask you to slow down if I'm missing arguments. I may ask you after the round for cards and evidence, so don't run out of the room until I've let you go. Be respectful in cross. I will not tolerate Ad Hominem attacks (attacks against your opponent and not their argument). I do not like theory arguments that are off topic and trying to be "clever" to win on technicalities. I will likely not vote on it, especially if you are abusing it.

LD: I have a background as a philosophy professor. Please make your value and value criterion clear and carry them throughout the round. Don't turn this into a 1 person policy round. I prefer more traditional LD arguments. If you are going to try to tell me that mass extinction is good, for example, it better have some hard evidence and strong logic backing it up.

PF: Make sure your arguments all make logical sense. I probably will not vote on Kritiks or weird theory. I prefer you have evidence to back up your claims but it is not always needed for logical arguments. Please present me with clear impacts and carry them throughout the round.

Feel free to ask me questions after round (if this is a tournament where judges disclose), but know that I have already submitted my ballot so please don't try to convince me why my decision was wrong. If you want to set up an email chain, my email is josephmpergola@gmail.com

Hello,

I am a parent of a LD debaters (my son and daughter), who have been debating for 6 years. I have been judging for 6 years as well. So I can flow some speed and understand the framework debate very well. Please do not use your highest spread with me. I understand the logical arguments if explained well. I like confident debaters. My average speaker points would be 28.5.

Background

I never competed in debates either in high school or college. I graduated from Park University with a degree in Computer Information Management after four years in the United States Marine Corps. After the military, I became an entrepreneur for the past twenty plus years. Although I’m a parent judge, I’m not new to argumentation.

Debate Preferences

I would consider myself a flay judge. While I will flow both sides of the debate, I don’t want to have to intervene in order to come to a decision. Always warrant your arguments. If you use logic and rhetoric to explain something, be sure to warrant it. Always weigh your arguments starting in summary if you want me to vote for your ballot. I’m going to expect frontlines starting in second rebuttal. If you are unable to quantify your impact, I won’t be able to weigh your arguments effectively. Ideally, I shouldn’t need to put in additional work off the flow to vote one team over another.

Speed

I am okay if you spread as long as I can understand and you can articulate the words.

Pet Peeves

-Don’t use foul language. This has never been a problem, but it needs to be mentioned.

-If this is the first round of a tournament, it’s likely I don’t know the topic as well as you will. Please explain your acronyms if it’s the first round, even if it means having to do it off the clock.

-I won’t keep track of your prep time. That’s not my problem unless a team accuses the other of abusing prep.

Evidence

Pretty simple, follow the NSDA rules and read the last name and year of publication. No need to list the authors credentials, I don’t care unless the source is disreputable. It is up to the opposition to point out if evidence is misconstrued. If the evidence is misconstrued, depending on the severity I will either cross it off the flow or vote down the team using the evidence. I won’t look at evidence unless both teams cite cards that contradict each other, at which point I will decide which team wins the card.

Please remember to have fun! Debate is all about learning, and if you’re not having fun there’s no point in debating.

Thank you for all the work and effort you are doing. It is a joy to watch.

Melissa Wenenn