Hi! I'm Tristan and I've competed in Lincoln Douglas and congress at MA for three years and will compete this 2021-22 year in both.

My email is lunaphin62@gmail.com

General Thoughts

I do not care what you run. I personally debated everything from k's to larp to theory so I have experience running and judging most everything.

However, please limit the high theory. I'll evaluate it regardless but trust me, that will not be enjoyable for me or your opponent.

Additionally, regardless of what you say during the round I will immediately drop you if you say something racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. As Spongebob once said, "don't be a jerk."

I'm tech over truth so idc about information outside the round, so if you don't say something in the round, it doesn't affect my decision.

Spreading is fine but please be clear, if I don't understand I'll say clear and if you don't become clear after three clears I'll stop flowing.

Always share cases, it makes sure the round doesn't turn into straw mans and helps every debater keep up regardless of skill.

If you're running something crazy then please let me know before the round and for the love of god tell your opponent. If they are not prepared for what you're running then I will not hesitate to drop you. No one should be excluded from the debate space.

Random Thoughts

Don't call me judge or sir, it's weird.

You don't have to read the resolution at the beginning of the round, I'll know the resolution and you can go straight into case.

Keep your own speech time please.

Please disclose prior to the round if you're running crazy stuff. If you're running trad stuff no need to disclose.

I try not to let my bias influence the round. I'm a high schooler and I pick the winner of the round. I have no position for you to appeal to so just debate the way you want.

Every framework is the same between vcs, robs, and rojs. Just because you use different names doesn't mean they're different layers, they're all ways in which I evaluate the round, always clash on framework no matter the name.

im not one of those people who gets triggered if ur chill in the round. ill give u higher speaks if ur funny

You better know your case. No matter how crappy you think your case is if I can tell it's one you wrote or put time into and your opponent didn't I'll feel no inclination not to vote down the person who stole cases or didn't put effort into their prep.

RVIs are cool.

I'm tech so I don't assume anything, you need proper warranting no matter how common sense of an argument you think it is.

Don't worry about gotcha questions in cx because one if you don't bring it up in a speech I won't evaluate it and two it makes you seem like a jerk if done in the wrong way.

CX is for questions, prep time is for prep, that's how debate is structured.

In any case, it's your round so you control where the debate goes, I'm just along for the ride. You do you, run whatever, and most of all have fun. Debate is most of all to have fun so that is the primary goal of the round. If you have any other questions please bring them up before the round and I'll be happy to clarify.

Trigger Warnings

If your opponent has trigger warnings on their profile and you ignore them I will drop you immediately and no further debate will be necessary.

If your trigger warnings are not posted on your profile or otherwise communicated to your opponent then you will not be given such leeway.

May the odds be ever in your favor.

Hi!

My paradigm is pretty standard to what I believe congressional debate should be so feel free to ask me any questions before a round.

Background

I competed in congressional debate for 3 years in the Carolina West district. I made it to quarters at Harvard, finals at Duke, fourth in my district in senate, and finals at the North Carolina state tournament. I also made it to triple octas at Nationals in World Schools debate in 2019 and double octas in 2020. I currently attend North Carolina State University (go pack!) and I'll be attending Duke Law in the Fall so if you can fit in any silly or snarky comments about UNC (where appropriate!!) it'll be appreciated.

Constructive Expectations

First and foremost, your job is to walk me through the piece of legislation. Assume I have no knowledge of the bill itself.

-First Aff: I expect that you give me an explanation of the problem and how advocating for this piece of legislation solves this issue. I don't expect (but I'm not opposed to) refutation from your speech.

-First Neg: I do expect refutation from you and every speaker to come after you. I will have the expectation that you will walk me through the problem with advocating for this bill and how not doing anything to solve the problem the affirmative introduces will be better.

Refutation

-Every speech after the 1st affirmative should have refutation. I don't care how you organize it into your speech as long as it is clear that you are interacting with what other speakers have said in round.

-I don't, however, consider just listing the last names of previous speakers refutation. If you are going to tell me that what Representative/Senator ____ said is wrong, I expect that you tell me why it is wrong.

-I prefer more refutation from later round speeches as this prevents you from giving rehash points. You have also heard more speeches before you so you should have more to refute.

Impacts

-Impacts are huge. You need to go beyond a cause and effect and explain to me why that effect is so critical whether it be bad or good.

Evidence

-I love a good piece of case destroying evidence as much as the next judge but I do expect you to go beyond just your evidence. I don't care if you spent all week hunting for as many pieces of evidence as you could find. I'd much rather you give me one or two and give me an in depth analysis of that evidence and follow it up with an impact.

Delivery/Rhetoric

-I will not fault you for stumbles in your speech. Fluency comes with practice but I do expect that you will be able to maintain your composure and continue speaking.

-I'm a fan of cheesy intros and jokes throughout your speech as long as it is appropriate with what your speech is about.

-I do not recommend spitting out rhetoric that everyone uses. If I hear you telling me that affirming this bill is like putting a bandaid over a bullet hole expect a heavy eye roll. I've heard it before and I'm sure I'll hear it again. This is not creative and, more often than not, feels more like filler words in between what you're really trying to say.

-Just because you are capable of shouting your entire speech does not mean you should. Your speech should have an ebb and flow of emphasizing what is important and backing off on what is not.

Questioning

-I expect to see interaction and involvement in the chamber but asking 10 shallow questions just to ask a question isn't worth it. I would rather you ask 4 or 5 difficult to answer questions. That being said if no one is asking questions and you stand to ask some I will appreciate it. This is a debate event. Not a speech event.

-While I do prefer you don't begin to scream or yell over the other speaker, if it is clear they are dodging your question or trying to give an extra speech feel free to cut them off. However, I should not feel like I'm watching a cage match.

-Avoid prefacing. The NSDA has not explicitly banned this but I personally believe that disadvantages the speaker and is simply a lazy way to ask questions.

Presiding

-I expect that you do keep a correct precedence and recency chart and may ask to check it if I feel like something is wrong. I will leave you alone otherwise.

-I will not drop you for the occasional slip up as long as you correct it. Honestly, if you don't majorly screw up, you'll get my top eight, maybe even six.

-I will be keeping my own time, as well as precedence and recency. If I notice an issue that is not called out I may not say anything but I will mark it on your ballot. Unless it is a repeated issue or I notice a pattern it probably won't affect your ranking too much.

Misc.

-Do not rehash.

-I won't drop you if I see you were trying to get called on but didn't. I will judge you on the speeches you give.

-While I understand there will not be an even split on every bill, after a while there are only so many speeches I want to hear on the same side. I'd much rather you give me a slightly less prepared aff rather than the 4th neg in a row.

-Above all, have fun with it. Some people may be able to debate in college but not all so enjoy the time you have. Don't take yourself too seriously and be open to the possibility of not everything going your way.

WSD Paradigm General

-In my experience, WSD is not meant to be very technical. It's not PF or Policy and I expect you treat it as such.

-Keep a world view when making arguments. Don't make your entire case about this US.

-Don't spread. If you start to spread I will put my pen down and just stare at you until you finish. WSD is meant to be more conversational.

-Try to avoid debate jargon? I may understand some of it but maybe not all of it so try to avoid using it.

-Careful with POIs. I've seen rounds where people will take either too many or none at all and it can absolutely break your case.

-Provide clear road maps before you begin your speeches please. It helps me to flow and keep track of the round.

Quickest way to be dropped

I have enjoyed my career in debate for the four years I was able to participate in it. However, I as well as many others, have had their fair share of rude remarks thrown my way. I have absolutely zero tolerance for this. Racism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, ableism, and transphobia have no place in Speech and Debate and any of this will put you on the very bottom of my rankings. I expect that everyone is treated with equal respect and dignity.

pronouns: they/she

I participated in high school speech and debate for three years and am a former captain from Crescenta Valley. Currently, I'm coaching at Berkeley High School and am a sophomore at UC Berkeley majoring in Geography and Urban Studies. In high school I predominantly competed in parliamentary debate and extemporaneous speaking. I competed and broke at states, nationals, and NPDL TOC so I am familiar with both lay and tech styles (prefer the former). If any part of my paradigm doesn't make sense PLEASE ASK ME before the round. I'm here to make your speech and debate experience better.

Debate: The biggest priority in debate should be ensuring that the space is safe and inclusive to all debaters. I will drop you for making it unsafe or exclusive (e.g. racism, sexism, homophobia, etc). Clearly explained warrants, links, and impacts will always be to your advantage. Signposting makes the entire round run smoother and comparative weighing makes the round far more engaging and easier to judge, so I highly recommend doing both. See speech section for info on speaks.

Theory/Kritiks: I don't have the most background or experience with them, probably not the best judge to run these arguments with, especially if they're frivolous. That said, I can flow them if they are well constructed and clearly explained and if you feel like they are necessary please run them. Ks and theory are pretty exclusive arguments, and many debaters don't have the resources to use or respond to them, don't use these arguments solely to flow your opponents out of the round.

Speech: If you want time signals let me know before the round and I'll happily give them. Speaks start at 27.5 for my base or average and go up/down from there. Novices will automatically get a one point bump. The main ways to boost your speaker rank and speaker points are by having engaging content, utilizing body language, having tonal and vocal inflection, and by adding humor and personality to the speech. I will give 15-30 seconds of grace time unless told not to (if it's an incredibly short event like spar that number is more like 10 seconds, don't abuse it).

I have about 7 years of experience in speech/debate and my pronouns are she/her. Please don’t hesitate to ask more clarifying questions if you need to but here’s my paradigm:

DEBATE

ALL EVENTS: Yeah ok you can go fast, I really don’t mind but if you guys decide to run some wacky arguments really fast please tag and cite clearly so it actually goes on my flow instead of getting lost in the sauce.

Being catty is okay because I kinda like a little drama but if I feel like you’re being unnecessarily rude, that may have an effect on the ruling albeit I would only use it as a tiebreaker.

Framing is key. Always.

I will always listen AND flow your last speech of the round so please don’t give up or halfheartedly do it because you feel like you’ve already won/lost. I’ve seen and debated rounds where the last speech completely changed the outcome of the ballot so please, try.

POLICY: I did policy actively throughout high school and have also debated the current topic. I would say tab/games. I’m familiar with most common K literature (Antiblack, Security, Baudrillard, Cap, etc) and will listen to anything but blatantly racist, xenophobic, homophobic, or sexist arguments. All arguments must have warrants and theory has to be explained.

LD: I’ve competed in it before but I’m unfamiliar with this topic so please tell me what your abbreviations mean. My policy paradigm is pretty much the same for progressive LD as well and if it’s novice, then just do your best and I’ll follow.

PF: I’ll listen to anything. I’m unfamiliar with the topic but familiar with PF and so dw I got you. Weighing is good! Structured flows and rebuttals are even better! FF and Summary are not just mini rebuttals! Please wrap up and give me voters in the last speech!

EXTEMP: Definitely need to hear sources and citations and they MUST be relevant. If you quote extremely biased news sources at me, I will be a little sad. Humor is an EASY way to get 1 in my book, however, make sure we’re staying on topic.

Any other event: just ask! I’m usually not that nitpicky so I’ll view the round however you want me to.

Public Forum:

I'm a flow judge who has experience in HS debate in the National Circuit--so feel free to signpost using jargon or just refer to cards by name, or use an appropriate amount of speed. I really don't like to or want to intervene on the flow. Please extend your arguments, especially weighing and warranting, so I don't have to. You can send me a dm on discord - muchanem#1975 - if you have any questions.

Flowing/ Speed:

I have experience in HS PF debate. I will be flowing on Flexcel and can flow almost anything except for the very fastest of spreading, around 900 word cases is where I will need a speechdoc. That said, I do prefer that you not spread a lot - and if you will be spreading that you provide a speechdoc. I understand the need for efficiency during/after 2nd rebuttal in the round, so as long as you're clear with your words, I can follow what you're saying.

Extensions:

Please extend cards with their tags - it helps me flow. When you extend arguments, extend warrants and impacts as well or it might as well not be flowed - unless your argument uses your opponent's impact which does occasionally happen.

Responses:

Please contextualize your responses in rebuttal. A turn isn't a turn unless you contextualize it.

Tech vs Truth:

I weigh tech over truth. However, I will drop a super techy argument that is near impossible to buy in the real world with even just a blippy response. I.e. I do flow everything, but don't expect me to not consider warranting.

Speaker Points:

Here's the hierarchy:

1. How easy your speeches are to follow/rhetorical skill.

2. How good you are in cross (but I will not weigh a round off of cross)

3. Being generally polite (no need to be over the top, just no bad behavior in round please)

Evidence:

I won't call for evidence unless there is an active dispute about what a piece of evidence actually says. Instead, I want you to call for evidence (if you need to) and tell me why I should buy your evidence, and recency is not a reason without a warrant.

Weighing:

Please actually comparatively weigh. A lot of weighing in PF is just scope and magnitude hidden as something else, I need you to properly weigh. For instance, if you have a short term econ argument, and they have a long term lives argument I need you to tell me why your short term econ argument effectively makes it impossible to solve their argument, why the short term is more important (urgency), or some other unique mechanism. Or, why should consider the long-term mechanics because of their larger scope or more central threat.

Crossfire:

If something important happens in crossfire, put it in a speech or it won't be on my flow. I only use cross to help me as a judge better understand arguments, and occasionally help decide speaks.

Extemp:

I'm a debater who also did extemp - so I do have experience in judging and competing.

Here are the things I like to see in extemp (in order of importance):

1. Content - extemp, at least in my mind is an event all about content and explaining a complex issue, thus you must have solid content - this means you have to be able to really have an information packed speech.

2. Painting a narrative - extemp still has to be accessible, it's not a presentation of the latest world event, this means you must be able to explain complex issues while still creating a narrative (I especially like extended metaphors)

3. Speaking ability - the most important thing is your fluidity, you must be able to present yourself as a knowledgeable speaker.

4. An eye-catching AGD - your AGD doesn't have to be funny, it just has to pique my interest (though I do usually prefer funny AGDs)

Here are the things I don't care about as much (not in any particular order):

* The amount of evidence you have - as long as you're not using 2 pieces of evidence for your whole speech you'll be fine.

* Perfect walking

* Gestures (as long as they're not overused)

Me:

Prolly like a lazy flow

Just graduated from four years of PF and had some experience on the nat circ (did alr w a couple bids)

Idrc about speed

dheerajpasikanti@gmail.com

Debate Stuff:

For most things, I'll probably understand what your talking about, but it doesn't hurt for you to explain it anyways

Signposting is good, but only if you think it is

You don't need to extend card names --- again speech docs are cool :)

I hated extending warranting and impacts, but it does win you ballots so you should do it if im your judge

Weighing is good, i would recommend you do a lot of it, especially in summary and FF

Frontline in 2nd rebuttal or 1st summary --- depends if your first or second obviously

Cross is like whatever, but its fun if your funny --- that doesn't mean you can make fun of your opponents, but maybe share a laugh

Prolly nothing new after first summary, but as they say if your opps bring up something new in second summary you get new responses in first final --- or just say that its new lol (or be safe and respond)

Send speech docs (pls i beg) --- cut card/rhetoric of whatever you're saying

^ if you send me a uncut doc of words from random articles yikes

Random:

I didn't really run too much theory or kritiks, but I understand the basics

• i mean go for it if you want to, but if your doing it troll not cool (i will know because thats what i did)

Dont be abusive and do abusive things in round (long times to get cards while your prepping, steal prep time, etc etc..)

Don't be racist, homophobic, sexist, and lots of other bad -ists/-phobics to your opponents

Literally just have a good time, its just a game

If for some reason I'm not judging PF, this stuff probably still applies, but ill try lol

Background: Competed in New Mexico from 1998 - 2001. LD, US Extemp, and nearly all Interp events. Competed at NMAA District and State competition. Former coach at Tom Glenn High School and Danielson Middle School in Leander, Texas. Began both programs when both campuses opened in 2016 and 2020.

Current: Independent coach (OO in Maryland), judging predominantly online.

Debate Paradigm: I'm a tab judge who prefers to be treated as a lay judge. I don’t love spreading but won't ticket you for speeding. Always provide a road map, with special attention to how well you’ve researched and read on your value/plan. My decision hangs on clash, solid sparring in cross, proper use of prep (pre-round and during), and voters - literally tell me how you want me to vote down ballot. Literally change my life with your compelling case.

Interp Paradigm: As long as you're convincingly conveying your interpretation and are deliberate with every movement, you're on the right track. Unless Duet Acting, interpretation requires you to interpret the authors’ work. Take proper care of the author's work.

Extemp Paradigm: Extemp is the first event I was successful in as a competitor and helped me decide that I wanted to coach. I like a traditional set up and will take notes down ballot on: Teaser/AGD, Intro, Question/Answer, Points/Subpoints, Loads of Mixed Evidence, Closing/AGD. I expect tight signposts with an approachable delivery.

I'm a sucker for ethos, pathos and logos. Please include your sources when making claims. Above all, I'm looking to BELIEVE the words you're saying, and that you're fully engaging in the debate. If you're furthering debate, you've got my attention. Please avoid personal attacks during cross examination and/or direct questioning.

Currently coach of Minnetonka High School

Hey Y'all I love weighing and extentions and plzzzzzzzzzzz signpost for me.

Ive done circuit for 1 year for LD. Done 2 years of LD, 2 years in other formats, and also 1 year in Congress

LD - Make sure to sign post when speaking. Use weighing mechanics to weigh impacts. Clearly explain framework and why your fw matters. If you don't signpost while doing your rebuttal I will drop it.

• Idk lately why a lot of debaters don't link their case back to their fw.
• Also weighing too duh????
• Signpost plz so I don't get confused lol
• Tech>Truth

If I yell out clear 3 times I will stop flowing

Circuit LD - Plans, Disads, CP, K and Theory only. I will not vote on tricks arguments.

Plans,Disads,CP>Theory>K>Other things

I will vote you down for any Tricks

Congress - Speeches must be clear and concise. The only way you will get a good placement if you actually have clash.

*Little rant: I don't know why nobody in congress have clash. This is a real debate hence you would need some clash. Don't just go up and say your side without talking about the other sides points.

How I vote on congress. Argumentation/Content>Speech points/Quality>Quality of Questions> Following Procedures

Email chain send to trinh120@umn.edu