Hello! You're obviously here to read my paradigm so a big THANK YOU to you

TLDR: I’m a fourth-year debater at Bronx Science so feel free to use technical terms. I’m flow (to a point, don’t tell me the sky is yellow or something ridiculous). I like polite and enjoyable rounds for everyone, and I like clear speeches and well-backed arguments. I’m really not that picky otherwise. The stuff below is just good for you to know. If you don’t completely abide by it (especially novices) it’s not the end of the world, so don’t worry :)

General for PF:

1. Speed is fine but no spreading because A. I can’t flow it well and B. this isn’t policy.
2. I generally dislike theory so run it at your own risk.
3. For cross, I don’t flow it so if anything important comes up i.e. you got your opponent to admit to something that really weakens their argument, mention it in the next speeches! Also, please be respectful, anything said that creates an unsafe space for anyone in the room will result in me dropping that team.
4. For case and rebuttal, I love clearly explained points backed with evidence. If you’re running something complicated, explain it well because if I don’t understand it I won’t flow it. If something isn’t on my flow I can’t use it as a part of my decision.
5. Please have impacts and interact what your opponents are saying, WEIGH FOR ME. If you don’t weigh I’ll have to revert to my own opinion which allows for bias on my part, and nobody likes a biased judge. Worse, if you don’t weigh and your opponent does, they have a much stronger likelihood of winning because they’ve just explained to me why it’s more important to vote for them, and you have not disputed it.
6. In summary and final focus, make sure to extend both your evidence and the narrative for the argument. Obviously it does not have to be as fleshed out as in case, but don’t just say “extend this contention where we impact X lives”, because that doesn’t really mean anything.
7. When I make my decision, I need to be able to vote on clearly extended logic and impacts. Be prepared to show me your cards (the actual article not a copied quote) in case I call for them.

I competed for four years, so I am functional on the flow, but please speak intelligibly.

Limited english. parent.

^that's a joke but I don't have time to update oops sorry

Collapse and weigh and I'll be very happy (I default lives if you don't give me any comparative weighing)

I am a parent judge without much experience, so please make it as easy for me as possible. Explain why your points or arguments make sense, don't just push evidence in my face. Cards do not replace logic, they should support it. Please weigh through the entire debate and tell me exactly why I should vote for you. Explain why your impacts carry through and why they matter.

As mentioned above, I do not have a lot of experience so please signpost each speech and speak clearly and comprehensibly (I will let you know if you are speaking too fast). Make sure your speeches have structure (you can roadmap them out of time if you want) -- it makes everything much easier to follow.

Finally, keep the debate civil. I will give lower speaker points to people who insult or demean their opponents. These tournaments are for fun, so I do not want anyone being personally attacked.

· Focus on making a sound, well structured argument – 2 or 3 strong points will go much farther than 5 or 6 weaker arguments

· Avoid acronyms and jargon that are not widely known – if you must use them, clearly define them

· Do not speak over one another – respect your opponents time – this is particularly important during online tournaments

· Speak clearly and at a regular, speaking pace

Hi Squad,

I am a Bronx Science Senior. I have done PF debate for 4 years. If you talk too fast, I won't understand you and probably won't like you either.

Let the games begin.

Xoxo,

Morgan

Third year out from Bronx Science debated all four years and was pretty successful (bids, broke at TOC). I don't know much about very tech argumentation (Ks, theory), but feel free to run them (just explain them well). I am very compelled by comparative and uniqueness weighing and detailed warranting!!! All offense should be responded to in the next speech and turns (esp if ur going for them) should be fully extended with warranting and weighing. I will not vote off blippy extensions.

wassup kiddos

I'm a senior at Bronx Science who's been debating for 7 years (parliamentary and PF), so while I'm not super versed in policy, I'll still be able to follow along. One thing though: please try and refrain from using theory. That's about it! Have fun!

To give into the debate lingo, I am a "truth over tech" judge. Use statistics and sources to back up your arguments, not to make the arguments themselves. In other words, explain your logic and then use stats to back that logic up. Your overall narrative is very important, and your fundamental logic is also important (i.e. don't tell me bees will cause nuclear war). This doesn't excuse the a team from their burden of disproving their opponents arguments, though. If your opponent says bees will cause nuclear war, make sure to point out that's absurd. "Cut out the fat," in the argument and get to the crux of what they're saying, this usually makes ridiculous arguments very clear.

Spreading: don't spread. Public Forum was designed to be informative to the average person...the average person would not understand anything if you're spreading.

Weighing: weighing is huge. There are almost always valid arguments on both sides, disproving each and every single one to a definitive degree is almost always impossible in a round. Given this, weighing is super important. Go about disproving everything you want to disprove but then weigh the arguments.

I did PF for four years in high school and competed at multiple tournaments, so I recognize typical debate jargon.

Haven’t debated in a while though, so most likely not too familiar with the topic.

I expect your arguments to be supported by data and statistics.

Don’t spread, this is Public Forum.

Don’t be rude.

If anything important comes up in crossfire, restate it in a later speech.

Signpost and weigh, always.

I am a parent judge aligned with Regis High School in New York City. I have been judging debate for several years at some of the larger regional tournaments, states, and local tournaments, judging mainly Public Forum, rounded out with a BQ qualifier and BQ nationals. Parliamentary Debate is a new format for me.

I work in finance. I'm familiar with basic debate jargon (turn, extend, etc.) but I'm certainly not a very 'debatey' judge. For PF, off time roadmaps are welcome. Please be sure everything you say is understandable. Speed is okay but you must be clear. If I can't follow you it will be harder for me to understand connections between your contentions, warrants, and impacts or challenges to your opponent's arguments.

When time runs out, please finish your thought and stop speaking.

I will vote off the flow.

i'm an old man hard of hearing, so don't speak too fast.

being better at debate usually helps you win rounds.

have some fun, sarcasm will almost always be accepted. - this line of my paradigm seems to have recently been ignored by debaters. please don't ignore it. i want to have some fun. please please don't be boring, thanks.

if you read off your computer i'll know, it's pretty obvious. i don't like it, that's not what debate is for.

don't call me judge i don't feel that special.

i make lots of faces so if i don't like something you said then you'll definitely know.

in general i hate paradigms that claim they'll bump speaks if a debater does xyz. so i won't promise anything. but if anyone makes a nixon reference i will honestly be so so happy, you probably would make my day on the spot.

extend warrant and weigh and you'll probably win.

I have no background in debate, but I've been judging since 2013. I have also been a practicing attorney for over 35 years. I am looking for a thoughtful exchange of ideas. I do not emphasize technicalities often associated with high school speech and debate. I do not like K’s.

Speak clearly and avoid spreading. I cannot credit arguments that I miss because you were speaking too fast. Arguments should be supported by evidence.

I like signposting and prefer quality of evidence and argument over quantity. Teams should do their best to collapse and weigh.

Explain why I should vote for your side, including why the other side's arguments fail and why yours don't, or why your arguments are better than theirs.

No need to be too slow, but speak clearly so I can understand you. If I cannot understand what you're saying, I can't evaluate the argument.

During crossfire, if one side asks the other a question, do not interrupt the other side when they are giving an answer.

Advocate your position through logical reasoning and support it by presenting evidence clearly.

Flow judge

PLEASE SIGN POST.

DON'T FORGET TO EXTEND.

WEIGH.

*I'm ok with speed but a little slower after not debating for a while so just keep that in mind*

For email chains: manna@bxscience.edu

Hii all! I am a pretty standard flow judge.

Warrant + weigh = win. (thank you Tenzin Dadak)

Please don't try to go for everything in the round.

I don't really care about cross, I might not pay attention during it.

Debate is supposed to be fun, enjoy it!

If you have any questions feel free to let me know :)

Ps. If it is the first round of the day I am probably a bit groggy so keep that in mind

I have to stress that being assertive and knowing what you're saying does not mean being rude, and I will take notice if you can't see the difference.

y’all don't hold back with the technical terms I'll get it.

I flow every speech but obv still clarify what the round is based on and all that. You can speak fast but if you spread I can't really keep up, so yk don’t. I will only write stuff down during cross if you say something notable or are responding to a specific point already of the flow.

I absolutely love crossfires so be sure to make it exciting; a quiet cross makes me think neither team is really prepared to argue (don't yell at each other though), I notice if you're interrupting too many times, and also I don't like it if you're just shooting questions at them without really letting them respond.

I appreciate the calling out of contradictions or just straight up bs (if you don't call it out I can still vote on i but i won’t like it so help me out bbs)

I recognize that cards are important, but if your whole speech is just stating cards every three seconds, it gets annoying and makes me think you have no real position. In the same way, logic is important but if you're just giving me "logical" arguments the entire time, I'll think you haven't done your research. So while you need cards to back up your case, you also need logic, a balance.

I know my paradigm is long but its just small things to keep in mind that will help you in the round lmao but you can still ask me quick questions for clarification before the round, dw.

Overall, debate should be fun so try to enjoy the round yk

I'm good with speed, I just appreciate clarity. If you bring me a snack I will give you higher speaker points! Good Luck everyone!

Please follow the rules and be respectful competitors.

I have no background in high school or college debate, but I have been a practicing attorney for more than 35 years and have been judging PF debates for 8 years.

I am a great believer in the “citizen judge” roots of Public Forum. The debater’s job is to persuade the man on the street, with no background as to the resolution of the month, that pro or con should win. Thus, clarity and focus are paramount. Your job is to persuade, not confuse, me. Well-structured arguments and effectively utilized evidence are key, but so are articulation, modulation, and engagement. A glance up from your laptop from time to time can work wonders, as can staying in the Zoom frame in a well-lighted room.

I do flow arguments, but not in a very technical way. A dropped argument will only count against you if it is material to your overall presentation and not offset by more meritorious arguments that make it through Final Focus.

Spreading and the pointless acceleration of pacing it engenders are strongly discouraged. You should choose your arguments carefully and deliver them at a pace, and with an energy and focus, that are designed to persuade.

Use your evidence fairly and judiciously. Do not overstate its significance or twist its meaning beyond recognition. I will only ask to see your card if the outcome of a round turns on an evidentiary dispute, but, if it comes to this, you want to be confident that your card can be read as presented. Also, feel free to request your opponent's cards, but do so sparingly and only when necessary to dispute a material contention or buttress a key argument.

Unfortunately, only one team can win; that’s the way it is in real life and in every courtroom I have ever appeared, so try to roll with the punches.

Most importantly, have fun. Few things are as satisfying as a hard-fought win; or as motivating (for the next round) as a too-close-to-call loss.

I am a junior at the Bronx High School of Science and a varsity PF debater. A few things to know:

1. I can understand fast speakers but prefer you articulate and avoid using too much debate jargon.

2. You're more likely to win a round by extending and quantifying your own arguments than shooting down your opponents'. It is still important to rebut and make sure your opponents' arguments don't stand, however, your goal should be to prove to me why you won the round.

3. BACK UP YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH EVIDENCE!

4. I personally will not call any cards unless it's obviously fake/misleading.

5. If you want a point from cross-fire to be judged on the flow, make sure you bring it up during a speech.

6. Off time roadmaps are allowed but not required.

7. I enjoy aggressive debaters but don't be condescending or demeaning to your opponent. I don't have the time or energy to report you to Tabroom.

I will usually disclose.

good luck & have fun

Hey! I'm one of the captains of PF at Bronx Science. my email: reynoldsk@bxscience.edu

My preferences:

Be respectful to each other. If you are not I will drop you.

I'm a pretty standard flow judge, tech > truth.

I don't care what happens in crossfire as long as it's not offensive or abusive. I will be on my phone in crossfire, so if something important happens, bring it up in an actual speech or I won't know that it happened.

Weigh, pleaseeee! If you don't weigh your arguments it will be very difficult to win.

Obviously evidence is good, but I will always prefer clearly warranted arguments that are cleanly + consistently explained over a bunch of card names being thrown in my face with no explanation and being told it wins you the round. It won't. Warrant your arguments.

2nd rebuttal and 1st summary has to frontline. Any defense on your case that you don't respond to is true for the rest of the round.

For novices: If you have any time left at end of 1st rebuttal, please, PLEASE, do not tell me you are going to "go over your case again." I know your case! Try weighing your case's impacts against theirs instead! Don't reread it to me!

Summary and final focus should be very similar, although I think FF needs to weigh more.

Please please please do everything you can to avoid progressive arguments. I will never automatically drop a team for running theory, but I feel like I do not understand progressive debate enough to evaluate it, and if I am confused in round about your progressive arguments, I will not hesitate to resort to voting on substance. If you do feel like there was such a bad abuse within round that it is absolutely necessary to run, you must make it as clear as possible to me.

Do not spread.

If you want more specifics on how I will vote, go to Ayanava Ganguly's paradigm-- I am too lazy to copy and paste his and he is much more eloquent than I am.

And most of all please make this round fun and not a headache! Any way you can make me laugh is appreciated :)

I take detailed notes (flow) during the debate. I do not flow cross examinations. If seeing a specific piece of evidence is relevant to the decision I will ask for it. I care about logic and the strength of link chains. The quality of evidence matters. Please extend arguments through the debate. A dropped argument will not hold. The speed arguments are delivered is only an issue when words become garbled and unintelligible. Thus, be very careful spreading if you chose that method. Please try to use all of the time allocated to you. It is easier for me to follow a debate when I can see the debaters. Have fun and respect the art of debate!

I debated for Bronx Science for (almost) four years, and I'm now at NYU Tisch studying Drama. I'm a technical judge, but lay debate is perfectly fine for me! For more specifics:

For starters, disclose your case and speech docs to me at sarmad@bxscience.edu. I have autism, processing info can be hard, so please send me stuff to make my job easier. Please send your case as soon as you get your pairing.

- First rebuttal can extend into final focus. If something was frontlined, though, I expect to hear defense on it.

- I love probability weighing, and I'm inclined to have a low threshold for responses to high magnitude, low probability impacts.

- I care about truth value, don't run something objectively false and think I'll buy it when it's extended just because I'm tech. Tech > truth as a practice is intellectually dishonest and I think that judges need to stop valuing it.

- Please have a narrative.

- The only progressive stuff I can handle is theory in the case of abuse. You must disclose that you're going to read it.

Keep my flow clean. I shouldn't have to do any work in making a decision. Be organized in your speeches.

- Collapse!!!

- Warrant + Weigh = Win (Ty Tenzin <3)

- I HAVE NO TOLERANCE FOR ARGUMENTS THAT ARE RACIST, ANTISEMITIC, ISLAMOPHOBIC, SEXIST, HOMOPHOBIC, TRANSPHOBIC, ABLEIST, OR WHITE FEMINIST. RUNNING THESE ARGUMENTS WILL RESULT IN 20 SPEAKS AND AN AUTOMATIC LOSS. DEBATE IS NOT A SPACE FOR THAT TYPE OF BEHAVIOR, NOR SHOULD IT BE.

- I hate America First frameworks, I will drop you or give you low speaks if you run them, with some exceptions.

- I pay attention in cross, but don't flow it.

- I don't look at cards unless you ask me to.

I will always make an effort to give an oral RFD, but will write it down if pressed for time. Feel free to ask questions, but don't argue with me.

debated pf in hs, policy in college (wake forest '27)

add to email chains - hannasapples@gmail.com

typical flow judge + will evaluate literally any argument

things i really like to see in pf

• overviews/fw that are weighed and extended through
• collapsing on turns is so cute + make sure you're impacting the turn
• line by line + signposting in the first half (if you number responses in rebuttal i'll be so happy)
• aggressive - not rude - cross
• my flow is messy pls tell me where to look/where to vote
• analytics in rebuttal not j prewritten blocks

notes

• whatever speed is fine
• tech>truth - i will vote for whatever offense if its extended
• kritiks are hard to run in pf bc pf was not designed for it - ill 100% evaluate it if you do it, but i will be shocked/appreciative if it is done well
• restating your impacts is not weighing
• if its late in the tournament i've probs judged the same round several times - keep it interesting

Cases

Speak well, clearly enough for me to understand you. Don't spread. I can tolerate fast reading, but within reason.

Cross

Be cordial, and allow for your opponent to fully answer or ask a question before you respond.

Rebuttal

Sign-posting helps me vote for you.

Summary

Collapse on voting points if necessary, and make sure to extend arguments in summary speeches, or else it will not be considered as I vote. Weigh if possible.

Final Focus

Clearly establish why you win based on the arguments mentioned in summary. No new arguments will be tolerated.

Past PF debater