Bryan Pearson Paradigm

Last changed 26 October 2017 9:56 AM PST

Last Updated: October 26, 2017

I have not judged or coached debate since 2014. From 2012-14, I primarily judged parli (NPTE/NPDA) for UC Berkeley and worked with the team throughout the season. I graduated from UC Berkeley where I competed in parli from 2008-12. In high school, I debated policy for four years. I have limited experience judging high school. 


Basic Questions/FAQs:

  • I did not have problems with speed, however, I have not judged in a long time. I will say "slow" if you are going too fast. I will say "clear" if I cannot understand you.
  • I don't mind if you prompt your partner or if you tag team cx, but if you do either of these poorly it may affect your speaks.
  • You can use your prep time however you like.
  • I don't care if you use your cell phone as a timer. If you use it for any other purpose (texting, etc.) it will negatively affect your speaks. Airplane mode is always good.
  • You may flow and read cards off your laptop. If you use it for any other purpose (facebook, etc.) it will negatively affect your speaks.


General Argument/Debate Preferences:

  • I have no preference for which arguments you run or which strategy you choose.
  • While you should tell me how to evaluate every argument you're going for by your final speech, if you do not tell me otherwise I will default to net-benefits on case and competing interpretations on T.
  • If you choose to do a performance you must explain why it matters in the round/context of the debate and you must explain the role of the ballot. Every performance debate is different and I will not know how to evaluate your position if you do not tell me. Keep in mind that, without framework/explanation of how your argument functions, you have no offense in the traditional style of debate. I've been told debate has changed a lot in the last three years. I'm sorry if this sounds lame, but please accomodate me and feel free to ask questions before the round. 
  • Theory positions should have an interpretation. Don't just say that Conditionality is bad; give me the actual rule of the game. For example: the aff can only fiat the USFG, they fiat individual people, this is bad because...


HS Parli:

  • I do not enforce the trichotomy (the belief that certain topics are fact/value/policy). I believe the debaters should decide this question themselves in the round if necessary.
  • I would like you to call points of order in both rebuttals if you feel it is necessary.
  • I do not time roadmaps, but if you and the other team would like to I don't mind.
  • Points of order should proceed like this: one team calls a point of order and gives a concise uninterrupted explanation of their objection. The other team gives a concise uninterrupted response. The judge decides if the point is or is not well taken. Ongoing argumentation or interrupting the other team will negatively affect your speaks.
  • You do not have to stand up at any point in the debate, including points of information or points of order. Choosing to do so is, of course, ok as well.
  • I do not enforce protected time. If you do not want to take their question that is totally fine, but if you would like to answer a question I don't think it's fair to enforce this arbitrary rule.
  • You do not have to engage in the "parliamentary pageantry", including rounds of thank yous, but if you would like to that's ok. Just be respectful to everyone and you will not lose any speaker points.


HS Policy:

  • I have not researched this topic and therefore do not know anything outside of common knowledge. Acronyms can be very confusing if you don't know what they mean.


HS LD:

  • I have been around debate enough to be familiar with LD style value-criterion debate, but please do not assume I know the nuances of the theory behind it.
  • When you run a K or CP, explain to me how the arguments matter in lieu of the value-criteria. If you reject the value-criteria style of debate and choose an alternate framework, make sure to do some comparison with the aff framework and tell me how the arguments function. When there is heavy framework debate at the top and then no articulation on how the CPs and Ks function within those arguments the debate becomes very difficult to adjudicate.
  • I have not researched this topic and therefore do not know anything outside of common knowledge. Acronyms can be very confusing if you don't know what they mean.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Lv Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VLD 5 LelandCL KKaid EH Aff
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VLD 5 NorthlCS TorreyAI Aff
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VLD 4 RanchoNR CherryJC Neg
The Cal Invitational - UC Berkeley HS 2013-02-16 VLD 4 KKaid RP Palo AMS Aff