Hello, I'm Ayesha Adams, I'm a current public forum debater (subject to change), at Success Academy High School of the Liberal Arts Manhattan. I did policy for 2 years, and have done a couple of pf tournaments, so I have experience within debate.

My email: ayesha.adams@sascholar.org or eshie0304@gmail.com (For Email Chains)

For Debaters:

1) Please be CLEAR, I prefer hearing your cases then seeing you finish your speech. Please make sure I can understand everything you are saying to make sure it is evaluated in the round.

2) For cx, please create some clash, no one wants to watch a boring cx round please make it interesting and something that adds to the round. Also make sure your cx questions are useful. Create clash!

3) Please clearly state your contentions, if you don't have contentions please clearly state your arguments.

4) Please be respectful to each other and to me, I will take off points if you are disrespectful in any sort of way, I will allow some sass, but don't be rude

5) Please do impact calc, during your speech and flush it out throughout the whole speech

6) I would prefer if you would time yourselves, thats critical to being a great debater

7) I will never vote for a death good argument, if you do this I will doc your speaks, please be respectful and don't do things like this.

8) In your final focus please tell me why I should vote for you and why you win, I need more than just "Judge we should win", I need impact calc

9) Lastly, please be nice, and have fun, don't worry too much about having me judge you I'm pretty chill when it comes to debate + judging! :D

Hi, I'm Rachel and this is my 5th year of doing debate. I've been doing policy and currently do it at bronx science.

My email: kassiopeia016@gmail.com

For Policy:

Tech > Truth

I'm fine with you being fast but as long as you're clear. I will say clear twice, after that it's a speaks deduction.

I'm not the biggest fan of k's but if you properly explain why it matters and how it solves best, then I will still vote for you

For DA's, T's and CP's:

I'm a huge fan of Da's T's and Cp's. I think you can make them extremely fun and well - versed. That being said however, You need to fully flush out how you solve the aff for CP's

You need to explain to me the link story and how they cause your impact for Da's.

If you go for T as neg, it needs to be the whole 5 minutes of the 2nr. You need to fully explain how they are harming the debate world and extend everything.

If they dropped an argument, don't just say they dropped it and that's why I vote for you, you need to explain what it means if they dropped the argument. I'm not going to do the work for you

For Public Forum:

I don't have much experience in this form of debate, but I do still know a decent amount of things. Still create an email chain.

Be slow and clear, I need to understand you and so should your opponents

Do impact calc and fully flush out your impact and why it should outweigh

Same thing as policy, if they dropped an argument then you have to tell me how that impacts the debate and what that means

I'm not going to do judge intervention

For Crossfire: Be assertive but don't be rude or disrespectful. Try to use it to help build your arguments or make clarification. Don't let one team fully take over the cross fire, both teams should be asking questions

If you start your speech with judge thank you for being here, I'll deduct your speaks. I'm not going to give you more speaks for this

Some Overall stuff:

In your last speech, give me a role of the ballot

I'll vote against any racism good, sexism good etc arguments

If you're disrespectful towards your opponents or partner then you get low speaks and an auto L

Please Flow, it helps you get better at debate and smaller risk of dropping arguments

You guys are all novices, have fun with debate. You're all still learning debate

hi! my name is sophie balyasnaya, I go to si tech. deasinia@gmail.comfor the email chain

first, im a lay judge (I know this, you know this...don't pull anything sneaky though). I judge novices, so this is directed towards you guys! PLEASE BEHAVE. I won't take off points at first if you're being rude or obnoxious, but its respect to both your judge (me) and opponents to act in a manner-full way.

second, SPEAK CLEARLY. I've been exposed to enough pf and policy to know what spreading is. You can spread BUT the limit is when I can't understand you anymore. PF is about presentation and if I can't understand you, thats a bigger issue then if you don't get through your card.

third, impact calc. tell me why your arg is better, faster, better for the environment. all of that. if you do that and the other team doesn't that shows a better understanding of the topic and of the style of debate. If neither sides do this then the debate is going nowhere and me as a judge can't tell who thinks they're winning and where my ballot should go.

I'm okay with off-time intros but if I feel you're just stretching it I'll start your time. With "I want to thank everyone for being here."no.please don't do this. if u read my paradigm and still decide to do it---minus speaks (not that much dw). But if you didn't read my paradigm (well thats your first mistake) I won't deduct ig.

during cross, it isn't your interrogation session. you can ask your questions but you have to make sure the other side also gets their questions in. I will stop you and have them ask a question if I feel like one side is being too aggressive and not allowing the other side to get a question.

any arg you run you have to understand. if you're running a k--be my guest. If you have a pre-written speech and you don't know what you're talking about--thats bad.

Ways to earn a few extra speaks:

give barclay a banana (with picture proof) --> +.3

do an entire cross-x in some type of funny accent --> +.2

make a good joke/ rock paper scissors game --> +.1

Yes, like Barclay's center

Pronouns: He/Him

Email: barclay.blair@sascholar.org or oddballbfb@gmail.com if there are permission issues (please include me on the email chain I suck at flowing)

Hi there, I am a policy debater currently going to HSLA-Brooklyn, and have debated for 5 years in various styles. I am pretty open to most arguments, and just have fun.

General:

Overall, I think that the norms of debate are constantly changing, and encourage theoretical/meta arguments during the debate round. I really enjoy Ks and theory arguments, as long as they are reasoned out. Generally, tech>truth, but if there is a real violation in the round (full on spreading without sending cards, unlabeled gish galloping, etc.) I am less likely to sway tech, just make sure to call it out in round. Also, please don't misgender anyone within the round, obviously mistakes happen but if it becomes a repeat issue I will have to stop the round. Also if I space out for a minute I'm sorry, I have ADHD and forget to pay attention sometimes (this is also why I request a speech doc lol). One more thing: I request that you don't eat or chew gum during the round, it is very distracting, messy, and disrupts the debate.

Policy:

Tl:dr:

Tech>truth, I am a big fan of theory and ks, just make sure to fully explain everything, and just have fun.

Case:

Please focus on case during the round -- don't let the neg control the round on aff. Make sure to extend your case throughout the round, and I encourage line by line on case.

DAs:

Not too much to say on DAs, they can be really solid if ran well, and really meh if not. Make sure to expand on your link story and establish a solid internal link.

CPs:

I am a pretty big fan of CPs, and think if they are run well, they can easily outweigh the aff. Make sure to clearly establish and extend the net benefits as well as explain why they are competitive. As a note, I probably won't vote on PIC theory off the bat, I think PICs are competitive and interesting, but if it is enough of a violation, I will vote on it.

Ks:

Kritiks are definitely my favorite argument to run in a round, as long as they are done well. I cannot think of a round in the past 2 years where I have not run a K on the negative side, and encourage the use of them. Make sure to fully explain and extend the framework you are going for, don't just say "capitalism is bad for education, aff loses", explain why, and why I should prefer the neg's framework. Also make sure that you explain why the alt works and why it fits under your framework, and don't be afraid to kick it if you are clearly losing that flow. I am most familiar with Cap k, security k, fem k, orientalism k, and a few more. I've seen a lot of anti-blackness, afro-pess, anti-queerness, set col, etc. arguments but have not personally run them, but again, am open to them. (Note: I do not recommend running afro-pess if you are a non-black team).

Topicality:

I am not very big on topicality and think it can fall into the realm of nit-picking a lot of the time but will vote on it if it is a real violation (or they don't respond to it).

Theory:

I am a pretty big fan of theory and think it can be really interesting to talk about the meta side of the debate round. However, please don't call out specific debaters in round; I will stop the round if I believe something offensive was said (also don't hesitate to come to me if you believe so, I might not catch everything) but I hope that's not going to be a problem. Note: I am not a huge fan of disclosure theory, I think on-the-fly prep is a part of debate and we all have access to the internet, but I will vote on it if I think there is a solid violation.

K Affs/Planless affs:

I'm not too familiar with K affs/planless affs, but I am pretty open to round-bending and wacky arguments. Most of what I've run in this realm has been meme-y, but I definitely will vote on both serious and joking K affs. Just make sure to establish framework and tell me why a plan isn't necessary/why we can't run a plan within the resolution.

Spreading:

I'm not a huge fan of spreading personally, but I understand that it is a part of debate and will allow it. However, I have to actually be able to make out what you are saying -- don't just jumble words together. I'm fine with spreading cards, but make sure to slow down for the tagline so I can flow those. Regardless of spreading, I request that you send me documents, but this is especially the case if you are going to spread. Also, if you are going to spread your rebuttals, send me and the opponents a speech document; I won't vote for you if I can make out 3 words in the rebuttal and I certainly won't penalize your opponents if they can't understand it.

CX:

I am a big fan of crossex in policy, and believe it can, at times, be more useful for one side than an entire speech. You can obviously ask questions if you are confused about your opponent's arguments, but I suggest that you use it to poke holes. As for speaks, I will dock speaks if one person is dominating cross, but only if it is a repeat issue, I understand if the other needs to prep. I'm fine with open cross as long as both sides agree, but if there is a maverick in the round, I will let them decide.

PF:

General:

Like I mentioned, I'm not super familiar with PF, but I know the basic rules. As a policy debater, I can't deny that debating about the debate round gets my rocks off, so push the framing of the debate. I will vote on pretty much any [not-awful] framework (util, epistemology, deontology, etc.), just make sure to clearly establish both why that FW should be preferred as well as how your arguments meet that framework. I would also like some in depth resolutional analysis, especially because I am not very familiar with the topic. Contest definitions -- don't let your opponent define things as whatever they want; it's only going to hurt you to not provide counter-defs. Other than that, make sure to clearly lay out your contentions and why I should vote for them over your opponents, and just have fun.

Speed:

For the most part, you can just refer to the spreading section of the paradigm. I understand if you have to speak fast, only having 4 minutes (why policy is better :3), but just make sure I can understand it. Also, same for policy, I'm really awful at flowing by ear, so I do ask that you send me speech documents if you have them.

Crossfire:

A lot of what I said for policy crosses over (pun intended) to PF, I love when one team uses crossfire to poke holes in another's arguments. Please don't speak over each other; it's very annoying, and be respectful. I'm alright with a little sass during cross, but make sure it doesn't get heated/disrespectful.

If you made it this far, congratulations, you'll probably be more prepared for this debate round. Finally,

+0.5 speaks if you bring me a banana

I'm new to judging, and pretty fresh in PF but got a good grasp of the way things should function. Essentially my belief is you should sum up your foundation of your argument and why it should be more important than the other sides.

hallo! im a debater @ hsla-manhattan. brianna.lu@sascholar.org if u start a chain (im 99% sure u won't)

only thing u needa take away from my paradigm is this: if u ever get frustrated by anything debate related, lmk

stuff:

- clarity > speed ur cool if u speedy tho. sure keep pf accessible but im all for u running a K for funzies, all i care is that u have fun w it

- tech > truth but deliver ur evidence well--it's the foundation of your case, not just another thing to talk about. please don't call for cards repeatedly; it gets rlly excessive. dont lie tho, ur not slick

speeches:

-run arguments that actually make sense. prove that u have truly internalized / are capable of presenting a case beyond your cards. be topical & have links!!!

- do impact calc!! i will likely vote off this. tell me ur impacts AND why they outweigh ur opps! i want to hear "magnitude" "timeframe" "solvency" etc.

- signpost & [offtime] roadmap!! organization will help both u and me so much. plz name ur contentions if you have them (idk what ur doing if u don't). balance offense/defense, extend both in all ur speeches (i struggle w/ this too)

- crossfire isn't rebuttal, so don't waste ur time. interact & create clash!! this is *debate* after all! (im bored make cx spicy)

- if an arg is still conceded after summary, it will not be considered in ff.

speaks:

- ur arguments matter, but the way u present yourself does too; be confident & proud! use hand gestures & look up during speeches. your case may be good but YOU are the one delivering it. u got it! :D

- as long as u feel the space is right, pls make jokes in ur speeches. a funny round truly will make my day (i'll boost ur speaks)

personal opinions:

- framework isn't a personal favorite but just be sure to extend it throughout the round.

- just a heads up, ive personally never had a good time with running/rebutting law-related args... u can run one, just make it make sense :]

others:

- please time yourselves, i kinda suck at keeping track for u

- always use prep (but dont abuse it)

- being disrespectful/inhumane is an auto-drop. bye bye

- let's be real: a win is a win, a loss is a loss, whatever the outcome is, u learn. u don't win until u lose (trust me i been through it)

- talk to me before/after the round! ask questions! i wanna get to know y'all & will help w/ anything u need, let's be besties

all in all, have fun & good luck!!

***if we vibe together & u show ur personality, ur speaks will be gorgeous. also, snacks are greatly appreciated thx thx. oh, and btw, my coaches r coach C and coach map. owe it all to them!***

Contact me at: oyosairee@gmail.com

Bit about me:

--I debated for SAMW/SAHW(it's complicated) for all four years of middle school, I now debate for HSLA-MA doing policy.

--If you lose/win, It's because I genuinley thought you did and will provide extensive reasoning both post round and right after as to why I made that choice

-Don't bother trying to argue it, take the feedback and go, I'll answer questions whenever you have them

preferences in terms of speaks

Try to time yourselves,as a catch all for mistakes.

Clarity over speed, at the end of the day, I'll prefer the most well articulated arguments over the ones spoken the fastest. Open Cross, but 1 partner should not be the only one talking, that makes the other one look bad, which is not what either you nor I want.(closed cross if there is a maverick debating)

Do not say anything disrespectful, or discriminatory, including but not limited to , racism good, sexism good, homophobia good. Your speaks will die

DO IMPACT CALC, especialy if you're a novice. Tell me WHY your impacts are so important, why it's more important the other team

--Role of the ballot arguments--> please don't make me vote on this, I personally think it's a dumb argument, especially in novice, just explain it well

Keep it fun!reference things, add jokes, we're not congressmen here.(yet)

you need to disclose before the round, teams win because they're better, not because they cheat

At the end of the day you're here to have fun and to learn, even if you lose all your rounds you're still learning something