Though I've been a PF middle school coach for four years, I consider myself a novice/lay-type judge. I do flow so I appreciate clear signposts, warrants and unique and impactful evidence. I am very much interested to see speakers attempt or execute innovation in form and style using humor, pathos and engaging impacts. I believe speakers who believe what they're arguing. I frown upon speaker dispositions that are communicated in a seemingly unfriendly, impatient or unkind manner.

Hi!

FLAY JUDGE. I coach middle school and high school public forum. I did debate myself throughout middle school and high school.

To win the round is simple! Just weigh and explain your argument to me as if I had no idea how debate works. I think debaters prioritize card dumping over good logic and analysis which is sad.

With that being said, if you plan on spreading, I would appreciate a speech doc lol.

I am a current debater on the national circuit for Poly Prep Country Day. Tech over truth, to a degree, void assertions dont mean anything. But a consistent narrative matters. I won't tell you how fast to speak, or force you to answer turns in second rebuttal, or ban specific types of arguments, but exercise good judgement.

My paradigm breaks down quite simply:

1. Engage arguments constructively. When I'm given an argument and a response that just make the polar opposite claims, it becomes impossible to evaluate if both teams don't do extra analysis, so do the extra analysis. Warrants are infinitely more important than card-stacks – good logic beats bad evidence every time.

2. Weigh on the link and impact level. Don't just give me prewritten reasons your impact is large (i.e., "scope and severity"), but instead tell me why your link into the impact is explicitly stronger than any other links/turns your opponents go for, and why your impact is more significant than theirs. Direct comparison of impacts/links will take you far – one good, common sense weighing mechanism adapted to the content of the round is better than four weak pre-typed ones.

3. Be consistent. Not only between summary and final focus, but also with a story throughout the round. If you read arguments that explicitly contradict each other for strategic value, I might not drop you, but you'll have a hard time establishing credibility. (extending both warrants and impacts at the minimum).

plz talk slow and explain your arguments well; the former is not necessary but usually precludes the latter

I debated PF in High School, coached in College and now work and run tournaments for the NYCUDL. I judge on the flow most heavily on the last four speeches. Please weigh and give analysis beyond dropping weighing mechanism terms. The more effective your analysis and explanation of the round the more likely I will vote for you. I won't drop your arguments if you don't bring them up in every speech, but I will weigh and value them less because that indicates to me that it is not an essential argument to your case. Be kind to your opponents I will dock your speaks for being rude to anyone in the round.

I'm a senior debater at Lakeland and have been debating for the last four years, and judged every year at Lakeland. I'm an adaptable judge so my preferences are by no means concrete rules, rather general guidelines.

Speeches

Constructive: I know the resolution so you don't need to read it your speech. I'd like to hear how many contentions you have near the beginning of the speech. The biggest thing is to really emphasize where each contention or sub point starts so I can flow it easier.

Cross: I don't flow cross but I do listen. Please don't spent all three minutes on the first question, or turn cross into a shouting match. I think cross should be used to clarify arguments rather than win arguments.

Rebuttal: Please make sure to tell me where you're starting, and when you switch to rebutting a new argument. Second speaker doesn't need to respond to first rebuttal, but it is often useful.

Summary: If you didn't weigh in rebuttal, you need to weigh in summary. Also make sure to include everything you want me to weigh in summary(Contentions + turns) Defense doesn't have to be extended in summary.

Final Focus: Tell me why you won the debate. Include weighing, offense, and defense. Don't make up any new arguments in final focus.

General things

Extending - When you extend cards, don't just read the author's name. I don't flow the name only the content of the card

Evidence - Have your evidence downloaded or have a paper copy. You should be able to retrieve it within thirty seconds of your opponents asking for it. Prep time starts when once the card is being read by the team that asked for it. If you can't find your evidence within thirty seconds, your prep time will start. If two teams say the evidence says different things I will ask to see the card

Time - I don't keep track of time, I trust teams to keep track of their own prep time and speech time

Speaker points - I don't give more points to faster speakers, so please make sure you speak at a rate that everyone can understand you. Clarity is the most important aspect for speaker points. I don't give extra points for politeness, but I do take away points for rudeness.

Hi, my name is Syed Hasan Rizvi.

I am a lay judge, but I will pay attention to the content of the round.

Preferences:

- talk at a speed at which I am able to understand you. I understand that you have a lot to say, however it is pointless if I cannot understand.

- try and stay within time

- be polite to one another. I like heated rounds, however rudeness will not be tolerated.

- Take note that I may not be able to understand debate terminology

Have fun!

About me: I am a parent judge in LD, PF, and Parli. My professional background is in IT.

Basics:

• Tell me why and on what grounds you’re winning -- this matters a lot
• Tell me how I should evaluate the round. Give me the standards
• ALWAYS make comparative claims about the other teams evidence & arguments (in relation to yours). Direct clash is important
• Speed is good, but clarity is far better. Be efficient with your speeches. If you can’t speak quickly without slurring, don’t speak quickly
• LD and Policy Specific -- Favorite strats to least favorite. Respect this order, but avoid if possible.
• Politics/Case
• Impact turning the whole case
• Topic specific T
• Politics/Process CP
• PIC with internal net benefit
• Ks
• Be nice. I will not give good speaks to people who act inappropriately in rounds or to their partners/team. Being offensive is not funny. I refuse to accept abuse in round.

General

Performance/Non-traditional: I default to traditional.

Speaks: 28 is average. I doubt you'll get a 30. Try not to talk into your paper/flows/laptop because I won't say "louder" unless it's really extreme and I might be missing arguments. Speak clearly and persuasively.

Background:

I have been judging debate tournaments for the past two to three years. I do this as my hobby and passion.

Things I like:

- Presentation skills

- Confidence in your speech and delivery

- Well constructed speech along with your introduction and brief about the speech

- Provide proper arguments and evidence/background of your speech

- Be creative with your arguments and speech

Things I don't like:

- I don't like when you speak too fast. You can speak fast but need to ensure that others can make sense of it.

- Can't show up with the evidence when asked for it

- Not able to answer clearly to the point on a question asked you

I am a parent judge. This is my 1st year of judging Public Forum; I prefer clear arguments and well structured cases. I enjoy clear explanation from debaters of their cases.

If you have any questions, ask me before the round.

Debate is a lot of fun, so enjoy yourselves and learn something new. Good Luck.

Hi. I am a lay parent judge. Please speak clearly. I'm a fan of courtesy and clarity.

Best of luck at the tournament!