Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 7:56 AM EDT
Current Coach -- Marist School (2020-present)
Former PF Debater -- Marist School (2016-2020)
Current Student at the University of Georgia
Please add maristpublicforum@gmail.com to the email chain
Debate is first and foremost a safe, fun, and educational activity so we should do our best to keep it that way
TL;DR: I am a tech judge and I will vote off my flow. Please do whatever you do best and enjoy the round.
General important stuff:
1) Extend every part of the argument... uniqueness, link, internal link, and impact. A claim without a warrant is not an argument. If you do not extend your argument then I can not vote on it. I really do listen and pay close attention to this so please do. I will vote with no shame against teams that probably would have won if they had just extended their argument fully.
2) I cannot stress enough that fewer well developed arguments will always be better than blips with no argument development or good warrants. I've noticed teams that collapse and more thoroughly explain their arguments tend to win my ballot more often than not against a team that goes for too much.
3) Please weigh your arguments. Explain why your argument is more important than the other teams.
4) My only real pet peeve is wasting time during or before a debate. Please be ready to start the debate on time and don't cause unnecessary delays during it. Preflowing should be done before the debate. When prep time ends you should be ready to start your speech right away. "Pulling up a doc" or something like that for 30 seconds is stealing prep and should be done before you end your prep time.
5) Second rebuttal must answer first rebuttal, defense is not sticky
Other specific stuff:
Argument types:
I don’t care what type of argument you read as long as it is well explained, has warrants, and is weighed (case, k’s, theory... whatever are all fine). You do what you're best at!
Speed:
You can go as fast or slow as you want. I will be good flowing any speed you decide to go. My only caveat if you go fast is to slow a bit down on taglines and still signpost well
Theory:
Any theory arguments need to be real violations that have real impacts. Frivolous theory is unpleasant to judge and will be almost impossible to win in front of me. I believe paraphrasing is bad and disclosure is good. At this point in the activity reading cuts cards and disclosing has become a norm that most teams adhere to which I think makes my threshold for responses to the shell even higher than it has been in the past.
Any theory argument should be read in the speech directly after the violation. For example disclosure theory should be read in constructive, but if a team reads cut cards in case and then paraphrases rebuttal then you read paraphrasing in rebuttal/summary whichever is next.
Speaks:
If you flow on paper and give second half speeches off of that flow a small boost in speaks. I give speaks primarily based on quality of the debating in round. Making good strategic decisions, collapsing, and weighing are all things that can help your speaks. Being nice and not wasting time also help. I do not really care how "good" you sound if you are not making good arguments at the same time. To put this into perspective, when I debated I always felt that winning rounds was more important than sounding good, but with winning generally comes better speaks.
