I am a lay judge. Quality>Quantity. Weigh the debate, and please do not spread.

I look forward to judging you!

I'm a Former MSPDP debater, Former-PF debater, and former coach for Winston Churchill Middle School. You will find me often judging MSPDP rounds in the CRDL circuit and now CVFL. I have debated 3 years MSPDP, 1 year PF, and judged for 6 years. (3yr MSPDP, 2yr PF, 1yr Gen)I also judge elementary debates and most speech competitions that Churchill attends. I also judge for Mira Loma, where I attended HS, and was also ASB President. I am currently a college student attending UC Santa Cruz.

In terms of my style of judging, I will base my decisions off of:

-any established/contested framework

-unrefuted contentions

-when debaters successfully argue a contention

-Crossfire.

Speaker Points

You'll most likely get high speaks from me anyways, but if you want a 30, win and don't be bad. Here are some other bonuses:

+ 1 for any Taylor reference in the speech (Only applicable once)

+ 0.005 for every second left in prep time

+ 0.1 for every use of the words: OpenAI, Kanye, Twitter

I have been judging for the last two years and am familiar with Lincoln-Douglas, public forum, policy, and parliamentary debate styles.

I can flow your arguments throughout the debate as long as they are presented at a reasonable pace (DON'T SPREAD!). To me, the most important part of an argument is logic. The argument should be well-explained and should make sense to me as a judge in order for me to be able to buy it. Evidence is also very important to support your logical claims.

Your speeches should be clear, well-organized and go down easily on my flow. I will not do any analysis or work for either side; my decision will be solely based on my flow and my understanding of the debate. Make sure to be consistent with your rhetoric and to consolidate your case in a way that is easily understandable (essentially, make me want to vote for you). At the end of the debate, I expect clear weighing of impacts and a consolidation of the debate because at that point, it is less about the nitty gritty and more about the overarching concepts and impacts in the debate. Make sure you clearly access your impacts and don't leave any room for ambiguity.

It goes without saying that any sexist, racist or otherwise discriminatory arguments are unacceptable under any circumstance and I will not tolerate them in a debate.