Amber Jones Paradigm

Last changed 4/27 6:57A PDT

Amber Jones

University of Nevada, Las Vegas | Foothill High School

I have been on UNLV's policy debate team for two years.

I have four years of experience in public forum from high school.

Please include me on the email chain

Email: jonesa22@unlv.nevada.edu



Quick Version:
I am willing to evaluate any arguments that you make, as long as you explain and execute it well. There is no need to change your arguments to something you think I like or will vote on, just give me the best debate you can, using your best arguments, and you will be fine. This is my first year judging policy so my paradigm is still a work in progress.


Long Version:
I will attempt to be as neutral as possible and evaluate the arguments presented in the debate independent of my own opinions. Keep in mind that debate is facilitated by fiat, the mutual agreement that we will discuss whether or not the plan should be done.

Negative strategy – I believe in preserving maximum strategic and theoretical flexibility for negative teams. Contradicting arguments early on in the debate are fine as long as it is narrowed down in the negative block and the 2NR is consistent. Though too many contradicting arguments (3+) will make me more sympathetic to the affirmative.


Affirmative strategy - A good 1AR should attempt to make the 2NR's job difficult by reading plenty of evidence, covering, and always using offense. For the 1AR and 2AR I think it is important to EXTEND WARRANTS inside your evidence. You should explain the importance/relevance/ implications of the evidence as well. Just saying “extend our Johnson ’12 card,” does not count as extending the evidence!

Aff- I am open to critical affirmatives that have a relationship to the topic. I have a difficult time voting on an affirmative without a relationship to the topic (as articulated in the round). I will not vote on T/FW just because it was read, it is the burden of the negative to prove to me why that affirmative is not topical or why it shouldn't be run in debate.

Negative critical arguments: I am willing to vote on critical arguments, as long as it is well explained and has specific links to the aff. Your Kritik should have an alt and impact that is explained by the negative, I am highly unlikely to vote negative if you do not extend the alt. I am not familiar with all critical arguments, but I have had experience with a wide variety. Good alt explanation can resolve any lack of knowledge I have. The affirmative should always permutate critical arguments, and explain how the permutation functions.


CPs— I am fine with counterplans, but prefer they have some sort of solvency advocate as well as a net benefit. The text of the CP (and all perms) should be written out, and I hold them to as high a standard as I do the affirmative plan.

Disadvantages- Needs to be as specific as possible to the aff and the link story should make sense. Make sure to explain how the aff links to the disad and how it triggers the impact.

Topicality- All for it, I feel that it is a very strategic argument to be made in debate. Needs to be well articulated with both sides submitting competing interpretations. T arguments should be extremely structured and organized to make it easier for me to see why this is a voting issue.

Speaker Points- You should be clear and able to explain your arguments well. I enjoy jokes and clever analogies that are relevant to the round and arguments being made.

Few other things-

  1. Do not steal prep!!!! I do not take time for sending out the document, but when the team that took prep calls time, everyone else should pause until the speech is handed over and begins.
  2. Only one person should be speaking per speech, unless it is a performative necessity or an accessibility issue in which case that should be made clear during the debate.
  3. Flow! If you are not flowing I notice and it probably reflects in the quality of your speeches, in particular the line by line debate.
  4. Debate should be fun; it is a game so be nice and courteous to everyone involved.


If you would like something explained further, please feel free to ask me some questions before the round.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Ev Rd Aff Neg Vote Result
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R10 X273 X249 Neg Neg on a 2-1
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R7 X138 X116 Neg Neg on a 2-1
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R6 X215 X139 Neg Neg on a 2-0
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R5 X188 X289 Neg
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R4 X221 X285 Aff Aff on a 2-0
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R3 X258 X175 Aff Aff on a 2-0
National Speech and Debate Tournament 6/17/2018 CX R1 X283 X243 Neg Neg on a 2-0
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/3/2018 VCX R3 Isidore Newman HV Univ Of Chicago Lab BS Neg
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF Double Oakwood Secondary School - North Hollywood Horowitz & Ripley Salpointe Catholic Gamas & Villanueva Aff Aff on a 3-0
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF Double Carmel Valley Independent Ho & Shi Nueva Conrad & Polissky Neg Neg on a 3-0
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF R6 Rowland Hall-St. Mark's Abdalla & Orford East Dohm & Weaver Aff
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF R6 North Hollywood Turkel & Kim Milpitas Mulaomerovic & Porchezhiyan Neg
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF R5 Hillcrest Han & Sial Davis Senior Brandt & Zhu Neg
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF R5 Prep Park & Wornow Fairmont Prep Ismail & Kishimoto Aff
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF R4 California HS - Whittier Murillo & Zarate Northwest Career And Technical Fagan & O'Keefe Neg
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 PF R4 Green Valley Banuelos & Theuvenet East Valdivia & Severeid Neg
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 NCX R3 Rowland Hall-St. Mark's AG Notre Dame KC Aff
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 NCX R2 Green Valley AS Rowland Hall-St. Mark's CD Neg
Golden Desert Debate Tournament at UNLV 2/4/2017 NCX R1 Green Valley SL West BG Aff
2015 Golden Desert Debates 1/31/2015 PF R3 Harker WW Desert Vista SF Neg
2015 Golden Desert Debates 1/31/2015 PF R3 Palo Verde BW Hillcrest SJ Neg
2015 Golden Desert Debates 1/31/2015 PF R2 Oakwood Secondary FO Juan Diego Catholic LP Aff
2015 Golden Desert Debates 1/31/2015 PF R2 Milpitas MS Hillcrest YA Aff
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R6 BASIS Scottsdale NV Los Alamos TW Neg
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R6 South Anchorage AS Horizon CL Aff
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R4 Carlsbad AI Nova 42 NC Neg
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R4 Fairmont Preparatory BJ Harker TM Aff
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R2 Mission San Jose AH Hamilton KP Aff
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R2 Lone Peak ZL Mission San Jose SK Neg
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R1 Scottsdale Preparatory KM Hamilton YD Aff
Southwest Championship at Arizona State 1/8/2015 PFD R1 Perry JM Hamilton SB Aff