Hi! I am an experienced BP debater with plenty of competing under my belt but I am relatively new to judging. I am currently a student at UC Berkeley and frequent tournaments as part of the Berkeley Debate Society.

I appreciate a very crystal clear speech with signposting and minimal ‘flowery’ language. A good argument should be simple enough to be understood by the average person so do include clear definitions and models. It should be obvious that teammates are working with each other and that a bigger cohesive picture can be seen after both speakers are done.

I do not prefer super fast speakers and people that have impetuous or condescending attitudes. There will be zero tolerance for any sort of bigotry and I expect pronouns to be clearly indicated and respected. We do not want a hostile environment.

When it comes to the actual material of your arguments, I will be taking a tabula rasa approach and voting, as expected, for whichever team can best tell me what the issue is and why I should listen to their arguments above everyone else. I will be looking favourably at debaters that both offer and take a reasonable number (ie do not interrupt every two seconds and keep it under five) of POIs and will be considering it as a sign of them further engaging with the debate.

I am a parent judge in my first year of judging. I appreciate the quality of arguments and a normal pace.

Mel DeBlasio (she/her) Yale '23.5

General Info

I'm a New England girlie who judges West Coast tournaments every once in a while. Parli experience only.

Be kind, be chill, and above all be respectful!! Any act of aggression (table banging), intimidation (yelling), disruption (whispering during speeches), or abusive argumentation will result in the lowest possible speaker points awarded. Please tell me your pronouns prior to round start.

Include trigger and content warnings. Let me know if you have preferences or accommodations that you're uncomfortable sharing with your opponents directly, and I will make an anonymous announcement prior to round start.

If your opponents have strong prefs due to different debate backgrounds/experience, you must try your best to accommodate them. There is nothing satisfying or educationally valuable about gatekeeping your opponents out of a round.

Debate Preferences

I hand-write all of my flow and have the attention span of a four year old on methamphetamine. I can keep up with fast rounds easily but if you spread, I will stop listening and the only RFD you'll get is how many ceiling tiles there are in the room. Spreading is unnecessary and an accessibility concern, and in my mind spreading = bad debater.

Please please please do not rely on tech jargon in the round to describe your arguments. If you cannot explain your case to a random person on the street, it is meaningless. The only "perm" I care about is the one Elle Woods used to win her third-act court case in the 2001 cinematic masterpiece "Legally Blonde", and if you start using half words, acronyms, and other nonsensical ten dollar words I will stop the round to perform the Cincinatti Stroke Scale on you. Techy terminology does not replace actual warranting.

Please no tag-teaming or verbal team communication during speech times, save it for flex time!

ELI5 and pretend that I have never read a book in my life.

I will listen to whatever type of round you want to have, however keep in mind that I don't have a tech background. All arguments will be evaluated the same, regardless of the technical or stylistic context: is it well-warranted? Is it unique? Are the impacts clearly linked? Did you weigh your impacts? And at the end of the day, you have to tell me in the PMR/LOR why your arguments win you the round. Lowest pref is theory because I find it uninteresting.

Please give me your creative, crazy, and radical cases. Please try to present unique and entertaining arguments, and feel free to joke around a bit and have a good time. My Breaking Baby brain loves it, and if you're having fun in the round then I'm having fun in the round. But leave your edgy bigoted "death and suffering are good, actually" cases for your Discord meme channel. And don't try to go OTT on details and style in sacrifice of argument quality... you still have to run a good debate round to win!

Dinesh Elaprolu

I have been involved as a debate judge for last 2 years. I am familiar with both Middle School debate and Parliamentary debate.

As a judge, I believe my role is to evaluate objectively and not introduce my personal beliefs or opinions in my decision process. I want the students to follow the ground rules and be clear with their arguments and evidences. I will flow the round, so I expect clear reasonings and properly cited evidences in my decision process. As per the rules, I will not allow new evidence or arguments in the final speeches. I am comfortable with any speed, provided the debater can articulate his reasonings well.

I expect debaters to treat each other and the judge with respect and as I mentioned above my decision will be based on debaters performance and not my personal beliefs.

Please feel free to ask me questions after the round and I will try my best to clarify your doubts.

Flow. Tech >>> Truth. If you don't say something I can't evaluate it.

Extensions: All pieces of offense needs to be extended in summary and final focus. If it's not in summary, it shouldn't be in final focus. No new responses in second summary or final focuses.

Prog: Theory uplayers substance and Ks. Default to competing interps. Run theory if you want I can understand it. Everything needs to be warranted on theory (explain why no RVIs, when opponents should respond etc).

Speed:Go as fast as you need to just be clear. Slow and clear is fine, fast and clear is fine. Just don't be unclear.

Run any argument you want, how you want it, I'm not going to tell you how to debate.

Hello, I am a parent judge in my first year of judging. Here are the specific aspects I prioritize: I prefer normal pace & would like you to be clear & concise. I like to see confidence in your arguments. I prefer arguments based on facts logic & evidence. I don't like aggressive attitude and prefer you respect to your opponents. Have a fun experience.

Praveen Gondra: I look forward to hearing your debates. Don’t rush your speech and try to take up your speech time.

I am a new judge interested in hearing logical debates and paced speeches from well spoken debaters.

I’m a lay judge, so Please explain your arguments very clearly. I am looking for logic, evidence, and analysis in arguments. And don’t forget to have Fun!!

I'm a lay judge, requesting respectful debate and valuing quality over quantity. Appreciate a slower pace, please.

1. I have only judged one parli debate tournament, but I have 24 years of experience as a practicing attorney, 9 of which was in litigation. I'm currently the Head of Patents at Google, which is a fun intersection of law, technology, and innovation.
2. Given that I'm a novice parent judge, I don't know a lot of debate jargon... but I do know a good argument when I hear it!
3. The trait I value most in a debate is a well reasoned argument backed up by persuasive evidence. I love great rebuttal/counter-arguments even more. Given that I'm judging JV, I will give leeway to imperfect speaking/presentation skills; that will come in time with practice and experience. That being said, if you have great arguments AND great speaking /presentation skills, more power (and points) to you!
4. I don't mind if you speak fast; I type and flow fast. However, please use your time wisely and prioritize your time on your best arguments; don't go fast simply to jam pack as many arguments as you can fit within your allotted time, especially if they are not persuasive. That's what lawyers do in real life.
5. I do appreciate an organized argument with clear guideposts along the way.
6. Be respectful to your fellow debaters. If you feel you have a winning argument, explain it to me without the use of put-downs or insults.

Parli experience only – I did some (informal, not circuit) in HS and marginal APDA/BP in college. I have coached and judged with the New Haven Urban Debate League for two years. Here is the document I give our judges at NHUDL. I think it's a fairly accessible and helpful (if basic) look into how I judge a debate round (just read first 2 pages).

I judge traditional debate. I am not familiar with West Coast or techy styles and don't know my way around theory and K jargon. If you start throwing words and acronyms around without explaining their use I will assume you're just having fun with fancy toys. I am apprehensive about tech because I see debate as useful only insofar as it helps you think and solve all those real-world issues you claim to care for, not as it helps you win debate rounds. That said, if you can warrant your higher-level, meta arguments and explain why I should care, I'll take them into consideration.

Explain explain explain. Talk to me as you would talk to an invertebrate. If you overwhelm your opponents with many silly points I will penalize them for not responding, but I will rarely ever vote for something I think is a bad argument. You do need to have a bare minimum of being proactive: explain to me how you won, how your opponents failed, and weigh the two sides. Most contentions are bad. It is your job to parse which ones are least bad, not mine.

To flow, I write on paper in cute little columns. If you spread, my columns will be strained, and I will be unhappy. I do not have object permanence so you need to hammer things in, clearly.

What strategies do I like to hear? Anything under the sun but especially creative arguments. Be kind-hearted and sincere, nothing edgy please. Be respectful, especially toward your partners. You can't affect anyone's performance but your own.

New to Judging, appreciate normal pace, meaningful elaborations, quality over quantity and RESPECTFUL debating.

I am a parent or lay judge with a few years of experience. I come with an open mind, eager to learn and be impressed by your knowledge, oratory skills, and respect for your team mate and opponents. POI's are OK, abusive heckling - not ok. I look forward to an educational experience.

About Me: I'm a parent judge in my first year of judging, and I'm thrilled to be here to assess your debates.

Here are the specific aspects I prioritize:

1. Logic: While evidence holds importance, I give higher weight to the clarity and strength of your logical reasoning.

2. Clarity: The ease with which I can follow your thought process and the effectiveness of your speech are important to me.

3. Honesty: I greatly value fair play, so calling out any fallacies or inaccurate/unfair statements is a plus.

· I am a parent judge with previous experience judging debates and public speaking.

· I value the presentation of the debate a lot, and look for good eye contact, diction, and inflection of the voice.

· A few well-developed arguments prove more persuasive than a larger quantity of arguments

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

· Please do speak clearly. Speed is okay, but you must be understandable. Please remember this is not about how fast you can go, it’s about how good your arguments are.

· And finally, please enjoy your debates. It will show in your performance.

I am a Parent Judge and I would like to hear about facts and figures during the debate. I would prefer to hear debate points in a slow and clear way.

All the best to all the contestants. Having been a judge for more than a year I look for good eye contact, clear and concise arguments, respectful behavior and clear speaking. Confidence is the key, not aggression.

Email : subrantap@yahoo.com

Hi, I am a lay parent judge with experience.

Things I like: clear explanation of your side and burden, clear path to the ballot, defend your assigned side of the topic

Things I dont like: technical arguments and fast speaking

I would like you to expand on your impacts, because those are really important to me.

I need definitions for everything because i most likely don’t have prior knowledge on it.

I am a lay judge.

New to Judging, appreciate normal pace, meaningful elaborations, quality over quantity and RESPECTFUL debating.

Hi!

I have one tournament of judging under my belt, but I did go to college. I guess I would call myself a lay judge but just way less technical.

he/him

Hi! I am a parent judge. Although I am flay, I have judged for many years and has experience to some extent. Here are a few preferences that may win you a round:

1. Please be nice to your opponents. If something rude or offensive is brought in, I will automatically vote for the other side.

2. Please do not spread. You can speak at a fast pace as long as it is clear, although I do prefer a slower and steadier pace.

3. When your opponents ask for cards, please give them in less than 2 minutes. After 2 minutes is up, it will count as your own prep time.

4. I do not flow crossfire. If you want me to flow something brought up in cross, please extend them in later speeches.

5. I have some knowledge over this debate topic, but please do make sure you explain your arguments clearly.

6. I prefer Truth > Tech, but if your truth makes no sense, then I will not buy it.

7. Please weigh impacts and bring up voter issues in the final speeches.

8. I will provide a 10 second mercy rule after you have reached the speech limit. Note that I will not flow anything after that.

9. Have fun! I am looking forward to seeing you all! :D