As a debate judge, where I spend most of my time, I prioritize content and persuasion. If you think your opponent has broken a rule, of course, point it out, but know that I already noticed, I am taking it into consideration, and I won't be according a win or a loss on a simple rule infraction like new points introduced in the rebuttal. In every event, I expect a certain amount of logic in your argumentation and also a certain amount of evidence (statistics, expert quotes, anecdotes, etc.), although some events will require more of one or the other. I will always look for clash: address what your opponents say when you speak. And speak clearly, not quickly.

As a speech judge, I prioritize engagement and clarity. Inflection and tone are far more important than speed. Creativity, continuity and cleverness will always be rewarded.

As a judge, my role is to impartially evaluate the debate and determine the most persuasive argumentation based on the merits presented by each team. Here are the key aspects of my judging paradigm:

1. Fairness and Impartiality: I strive to be fair and impartial in evaluating the debate. I will assess arguments solely based on their quality, without bias or preference for any particular team or argumentative style.

2. Clarity and Organization: I value clear and well-organized arguments that are easy to follow. Debaters should present their points in a logical manner, with clear signposting and transitions between arguments.

3. Evidence and Analysis: I place a high importance on the use of evidence and analysis to support arguments. Debaters should provide relevant and credible evidence to substantiate their claims, and demonstrate critical thinking through thoughtful analysis.

4. Rebuttal and Refutation: Effective rebuttal is key to winning debates. I expect debaters to actively engage with their opponents' arguments, identifying weaknesses and providing counterarguments supported by evidence.

5. Cross-Examination: I encourage debaters to use cross-examination strategically to clarify their opponents' arguments, challenge assumptions, and highlight inconsistencies. I will consider the effectiveness of cross-examination in my evaluation.

6. Respectful Conduct: Respectful conduct towards opponents, judges, and audience members is essential. I will penalize debaters for any instances of disrespectful behavior, including personal attacks or rudeness.

7. Adherence to Rules and Time Limits: Debaters should adhere to the rules and time limits set for the debate. I will deduct points for any violations of rules or exceeding time limits, as these can impact the fairness of the competition.

8. Decision Criteria: In making my decision, I will consider the persuasiveness of the arguments presented, the quality of evidence and analysis, the effectiveness of rebuttal, and overall presentation style. I will strive to provide constructive feedback to help debaters improve their skills.

Overall, I approach judging with a commitment to fairness, integrity, and the promotion of excellence in debate. I aim to provide a constructive evaluation that recognizes and rewards the strengths of each team while encouraging continuous improvement.

Parent judge, moderate experience with Parli and some PF, I maintain as detailed a flow as possible, truth>tech

(if there is jargon in this paradigm it is because my daughter actually wrote it while consulting me on the content, not because I understand debate jargon)

Speak clearly and at a reasonable pace (don't spread!), signpost, limit jargon, etc. (if I don't understand you, it doesn't go on my flow, if it doesn't go on my flow, I'm not taking it into consideration)

Just saying cross-apply this with (x contention) is not a valid refutation in the absence of an explanation

Clearly state and weigh your impacts, provide clear logical links, POO any rules violations

Not super experienced with Ks or Theory, it is likely best not to run it with me and if you do, you must explain it well and in detail

Be respectful to your opponents and me. I will give you lower speaks if you are not.

A big pet peeve of mine is when debaters tell me how to vote ("judge, you MUST vote government on this"). I'm sorry, I know it's just what you do in debate, but it's really annoying - tell me how I can vote, give me voting issues, weigh your impacts against those of your opponents, but please for the love of God do not order me to vote for your side. I'm the judge, I'm here for a reason, I'll tell you who won (after flowing the round and evaluating it to the best of my ability)

I did speech and debate in high school and college and love seeing all of you engage in it as I know what an educational and fun activity it can be. Above all, I hope that you have a fun, educational, and constructive debate and that I can facilitate that to the best of my ability. Good luck!!