Hey dudes !

I am a rad debate dad. I’ve judged world schools pretty frequently and consider myself to be a pretty okay judge. I’ll vote you up on style content and strategy, but really try and sell what you’re saying to me.

truth> tech

signposting will help you a lot

im a proud speech dad:)

speech events for me:

info, OO :

am I being informed , am I being persuaded and am I being entertained? This all is important to me in these events

try your best to know your material back and forth so you are able to make the best presentation possible when it’s Go time ????

DI, HI:

Does your piece move me and bring emotion to the surface-is it thought provoking ?

Congress : this always is entertaining to me

a good mix of speech and worlds debate here-

Please know your bills and cases for them - I pay attention close to that as well as the cross fire of questions afterwards and how you respond or how you are asking the questions if you are in that case

PF/LD-

this is all about your cases being built very strong - so this is research and memory and able to be quick on your feet in the crossfire questioning

please no spreading

amen.

let’s have some fun!

Hi, all!

I am in my third decade of this activity and love the outcomes it affords graduates. I do fear that some of the modern trophy-hunting tricks undercut the educational value / critical thinking / topic discovery aspects of debate. I admire speakers, debaters, and programs who explore a topic's possibilities, implications, unintended consequences, and force a consideration of new issues.

Debate Events

I am energized by creative interpretations of the topic, exploration of hidden causes / unforeseen (but provably viable) outcomes, and the realpolitik / pragmatic examination of the issues presented by the topics. I do not believe that anything other than CX requires a plan in order to be evaluated.

LD is asking the question "why" an action should / n't be done. Debaters are free to offer plans, but should be willing to engage in "why" debate on a philosophical / moral justification level. I prefer a problem-solving approach to rope-a-dope debate. I believe judges should have the right (perhaps obligation) to apply some semblance of critical thinking to the cases presented when considering how to evaluate them. There is a prima facie aspect to debate which requires arguments to be upheld as reasonable in order for the case to stand on "first face." Everyone's definition of "speed" is different, so I will simply say that I appreciate being given the opportunity to consider your argument. I should not have to rely on the e-mail chain to tell me what you said or interpret what you meant. The e-mail chain should probably be for reviewing cards at the end of the round as needed. In short, e-mail chains do not replace the communicative aspect of the event and relying on them to do such can limit the general outcomes of all participants in the round.

I do not resonate with pre-emptive theory ("they didn't put it on the wiki") arguments in lieu of substantive debate. You are free to run them in conjunction, but you need to do a lot of work to convince me the harm that's being done because what you say is "the way things are" is not being done. I'm all for challenging prevailing assumption, but just because you said it's so does not make it such.

WSD teams should ensure some semblance of balance and equity amongst team members. Having a first speaker essentially read case and then get out of the way so second speaker can do the heavy lifting for the next hour doesn't really reflect well on the team. In a points race, it is imperative that all parties on the team are pulling their share of the weight. I love teams who have multiple levels of conceptualizing the same point. Exploring the pragmatic level and/or the moral level and/of the economic level and/or... allows the judge to have multiple "outs" to agree with you and demonstrates a depth of topic mastery that compares favorably to teams who rely on one level throughout. WSD is a wonderful combination of presentation and argumentation / content and I follow the proportional consideration of each provided on the ballot.

I am a lay judge, but I have judged a reasonable number of rounds. You may speak fast, as long as you are understandable. Cite your sources as much as possible. If you call for evidence outside of cross-ex, you will be using your prep time. Also, please avoid asking really long questions during cross-ex, andactually let the other team answer. I give speaker points based on strategy and presentation. I may dock your speaks if you take forever to pull up a piece of evidence. To avoid this, please start an email chain and add me at subashri.r@gmail.com.

Debate is about having fun, so enjoy it!!

I am a parent judge. Lay arguments only. Do not spread.

WSD: I am a parent judge. Please make arguments understandable, and explain each principle and practical clear. I normally judge speeches, so that is where my viewpoint is at.

I did not do debate in high school or college.

I have coached speech and debate for 20 years. I focus on speech events, PF, and WSD. I rarely judge LD (some years I have gone the entire year without judging LD), so if I am your judge in LD, please go slowly. I will attempt to evaluate every argument you provide in the round, but your ability to clearly explain the argument dictates whether or not it will actually impact my decision/be the argument that I vote off of in the round. When it comes to theory or other progressive arguments (basically arguments that may not directly link to the resolution) please do not assume that I understand completely how these arguments function in the round. You will need to explain to me why and how you are winning and why these arguments are important. When it comes to explanation, do not take anything for granted. Additionally, if you are speaking too quickly, I will simply put my pen down and say "clear."

In terms of PF, although I am not a fan of labels for judges ("tech," "lay," "flay") I would probably best be described as traditional. I really like it when debaters discuss the resolution and issues related to the resolution, rather than getting "lost in the sauce." What I mean by "lost in the sauce" is that sometimes debaters take on very complex ideas/arguments in PF and the time limits for that event make it very difficult for debaters to fully explain these complex ideas.

Argument selection is a skill. Based on the time restrictions in PF debate, you should focus on the most important arguments in the summary and final focus speeches. I believe that PF rounds function like a funnel. You should only be discussing a few arguments at the end of the round. If you are discussing a lot of arguments, you are probably speaking really quickly, and you are also probably sacrificing thoroughness of explanation. Go slowly and explain completely, please.

In cross, please be nice. Don't talk over one another. I will dock your speaks if you are rude or condescending. Also, every competitor needs to participate in grand cross. I will dock your speaks if one of the speakers does not participate.

For Worlds, I prefer a very organized approach and I believe that teams should be working together and that the speeches should compliment one another. When each student gives a completely unique speech that doesn’t acknowledge previous arguments, I often get confused as to what is most important in the round. I believe that argument selection is very important and that teams should be strategizing to determine which arguments are most important. Please keep your POIs clear and concise.

If you have any questions, please let me know after I provide my RFD. I am here to help you learn.

Pronouns: he/him

Hi there!

Most importantly, I want y'all to know that I am a parent judge, and a novice one at that, but I assure you, you'll have my full attention and respect during every round I judge.

Any homophobia, sexism, ableism, racism, etc. against your opponents or your own teammates will result in an automatic loss. I will immediately stop following the debate and will report the behavior to your coaches.

Debate is about respect. If you don’t show respect your opponents, or me, that will significantly impact your speaks and your ballot. Attempting to make your opponent feel bad about themself is not acceptable, and it will have a negative impact on your score.

Speed is ok, but please articulate and speak at a volume that I can hear from several yards away. Spreading is difficult to flow, so please avoid it whenever possible.

Please don’t present any Theory or K’s, because I don’t know how to flow those.

I most likely will not disclose after round; I like to take time to articulate my thoughts on your performance in writing out of respect for the work you've put into your debate.

If you want to send me pictures of your cats, or see pictures of my cats, my email is acwlazlowski@gmail.com :)

As a judge, and a mom, I’m always rooting for you and want you to do well! GOOD LUCK!

Speech:

First off, I’m gonna be biased here, speech is my ABSOLUTE favorite! Here are some individual things you can do to maximize your success in these events.

General:

Creativity, character, and confidence! That’s how you can impress me and get a great ranking if I’m your judge.

Being respectful during other’s speeches is absolutely necessary. If you don’t want someone texting, eating, moving whilst you’re trying to give your speech then don’t do it to others!

If you make a mistake, remember, I DON’T KNOW! I don’t have your script! Stay calm, and keep going!

Info:

If your boards fall, don’t worry! Im not going to rank you down for it, accidents happen. I look for clear speakers, with a well structured speech. Sourcing is always good, make sure the information you cite is relevant.

Oratory

Similar to info, annunciate and make sure to truly convey your message. Movements and actions are always fun and engaging!

Interp:

Y’all there is a line. Interp can be one of the absolute best events to experience as a judge, but not if the content is excessively vulgar. Im fine with swearing and vulgar pieces, but please just don’t make it nasty to where I want to leave the room. Please? This is mainly for HI but don’t abuse other people’s trauma! Make your character come to life, make it seem natural!

This is for DI specifically, I’m probably going to cry. And maybe a lot. But! Please don’t feel like you haven’t impressed me if I’m not sobbing; some pieces are more touching for personal reasons than others are. Just make your character as moving and piece as powerful as possible and you will like your rank!

Extemp:

This event is pretty easy to judge in terms of what I look for:

-structure (Intro 3 points conclusion)
-sourcing (Not just for the “I added some sources to my speech,” check box, but rather to support your point and what you’re saying”

-Hey it’s out of your control if you get a boring question, keep me interested and engaged and it won’t really matter what your question is!

-Avid supporter of Taylor Swift if you wanna use an AGD for her… (Favorite album is 1989 of course)

Other speech events:

I don’t know a whole lot about other speech events, but I love to see new events and see new styles of Speech! If you don’t see anything on here for specifics, ask me about them or maybe even tell me something useful for judging before.

Congress:

This is one of the first times that I'm judging Congressional Debate. Please be patient. I've learned how to judge it, but some of the logistics of the round may throw me off because congress is based off of role playing congressional officials.

I value not only speeches, but also the way you behave in questioning, recess, etc. If you give really great speeches, but you are disrespectful or rude in questioning, you’re not going to like your rankings.

Again, I reiterate, I'm really big on respect. You guys all work so hard to prepare so I ask that you give everyone in your chamber the same level of attention and respect you'd like to receive yourself. If you are respectful to me and most importantly, your opponents, I'm more likely to rank you higher for exhibiting the respect the round and your opponents deserve and keeping the round running smoothly.

For my PO: I appreciate you running the round and making it as efficient as possible. If you run a good chamber, I will give you a good rank. If you run a chaotic chamber with frequent mistakes and pauses, your rank will most likely be impacted. PLEASE bring it to the attention of the PO if there is a mistake in round. I want to make sure the round is running as fair as possible

In speeches I look for an equal balance of content and style. I look for people being active in the round as well. If person A gives one great speech throughout the entirety of the round, and person B gives three decent speeches but is always questioning and very active, person B will be who I most likely rank higher.

I think Congress specifically has really good potential for personality as well. I appreciate fun AGD’s, a good tone, decent volume, and smile. The point here is to have fun and be confident. Make judging fun for me as well, and your rank will affect it.

Try not to rehash, and if it reaches a point in which it’s just the same 4 points over and over, move to previous question. I want to make sure everyone gets a speech.

Recess is not for prepping a speech, it’s not fair to take time away from others because you didn’t prep. Please try to keep the chamber running!

I wish you all the best and I’m super excited to see you in round! Good luck!