hello my email is jmeza111401@gmail.com (use this for any questions or to add me to the email chain.)

For CX and LD only also add: debatestockdale@gmail.com

I am a LAMDL alumni and debated for stern MASS for three years and currently debating for Cal State Fullerton. I have been both the 2a and the 2n im honestly open to anything as a judge except any ism if you have to ask yourself "is this okay to run in front of him ?" the answer is probably no.

Past affiliations:

San Marino (LD) 2019-2020

Stern MASS (CX) 2017-2020

Port of Los Angeles GR (CX) 2020 - 2021

current affiliations:

Stockdale High School (LD & CX) 2021 -

k affs and performance: Go for it. One thing I would add is to be accessible for example if you read a poem have a transcript for me and your opponents and etc. Affirmatives can be in direction of the topic or not it is up to you to still provide a justification and reasoning to why your model of debate is preferable. I buy counter interps more often than we meets.

framework: I don't lean aff on framework debates but there is definitely an above average threshold when competing different models of debate.
procedural fairness is an internal link although the competitive aspect of debate exist and a fair "game" is probably good. Good TVAs are good.

topicality: if you are going for topicality or any theory argument in the 2ar/2nr you need to extend interpretations, violations, and standards. Standards must have impacts fairness and education is not super persuasive and will probably lean to reasonability.

kritiks: Link contextualization is key no matter the kritik. Alternative contextualization is key too if at the end of the round I do not understand what your alternative does than I am probably going to lean aff on this flow. kicking the alt in the 2nr is not the most convincing strategy and I will most likely not judge kick the alt unless the neg tells me to and the aff drops it. even if I am familiar with your lit base please still explain the ontology debate thoroughly.

counterplans: I lean neg on conditionality 5-7 off is fine 8+ off is a bit questionable. make sure that your counterplans are textually competitive some of them are already cheaty enough. Well explained net benefits to the CP is a must.

disads: Link contextualization is key. specific links are even better. I love good impact calc debates. please explain the internal link chain.

Spreading: when people spread super fast I tend to get off track so please slow down especially in the beginning so I can get used to your voice. If I miss something important than I will probably wont count it in my decision.

truth ≥ tech

TLDR: Email me for any questions or if my paradigm had any typos. Take care and take a break from debate. breaks are good.

LD: you can read tricks in front of me but please impact it out I have judged way to many theory vs theory debates where I have no clue where to vote because there was no impact calc or reason why one arg comes before the other. Other than that policy stuff above applies just please please explain your arguments the time constraints in ld is real but contextualization of links are important.

vibes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLhssMg3GN4&ab_channel=Ondatr%C3%B3pica-Topic