I was a PF debater in high school and American Parliamentary in college. This paradigm is very PF-centric, but some things apply for any debate round.

Evidence: I don't want a round with just cards being rattled off or arguing over sources (feel free to call out bad sources of course, but I will not be happy if all of cross is just arguing back and forth about cards instead of the real topic). I'm happy with a certain amount of logic being used over evidence when fitting. Don't shy away from making logical arguments solely because you don't have 12 cards to back it up. Further, just because you do have a card and your opponent doesn't have one does NOT mean you automatically win the argument- if they can effectively argue that your card is completely illogical and nonsensical and you can't adequately defend it, it's not going to go your way.

Please do not misrepresent your cards or cut them in a deceiving way. If you do that, it will be a huge knock on you.

Speed: I'm fine with speed as long as you're not completely spreading.

Weighing: Please, please, PLEASE weigh. You might be throwing away half the arguments you focused on in your speech if you are not weighing them. Clash and weighing are some of the most essential parts of debate.

Respect: I have no tolerance for rudeness; if you are extremely condescending, scream over opponents, never give your opponent a reasonable opportunity to respond in cross, etc, I see it as a reason to drop. Treat your opponents with basic respect and don't be racist/homophobic/etc. Don't assume your opponent's pronouns.

Timing: I will time you and stop flowing after about a 10 second grace period. You can ramble on for an extra 50 seconds or whatever, but it won't get flowed by me so it serves no purpose. If you start going way over time, I will cut you off. Please time yourself, though. I will get annoyed if I have to do this and it can hurt your speaker points. If there's a reason you can't time yourself, no big deal- just let me know and I will be happy to give you hand signals or whatever you need. It won't bother me as long as you let me know!

Sliming: Do not introduce new arguments in final focus. I will be paying attention to what's new and totally ignoring all of it.

Cross: I don't flow cross. I pay attention, of course, but if you make a good point in cross, you need to discuss it in your speeches for it to count on the flow.

If judging LD, I will be unfamiliar with lots of the phil, so just be sure to clearly explain your framework!

If you have any other questions before the round begins, please feel free to ask!

I am a judge that values both substance and format.

Have competed in LD, PF, Policy, and Extemp; have coached LD, PF, Policy, and Parliamentary Debate. Will flow all debates. Hate spreading in all events.

LD: Stats and empirical data are fine but without strong philosophical backing, it will be hard for me to give a win. Prefer applications of philosophical framework that show some level of thought and intuition (I think a Value of Morality is fairly weak and needs an extremely strong VC to be successful).

PF & Parli: Nothing major, but again, no spreading. Require credible sources with actual data — opinion pieces are fine, but much weaker than empirical data. If you try to extrapolate data from a source like multiplying stats incorrectly, then quote them as part of the source, I will give you the loss automatically. It must be very clear what is your own mathematical extrapolation (which is more than likely incorrect), and what is actually part of the original source. If you do not have a piece of evidence cited in your case, you will also automatically receive a loss.

Policy: Do whatever you want.

I am a parent judge, please speak clearly, slowly if possible, and emphasize the key reasons.

Please do not interrupt when your competing colleague(s) is(are) speaking.

When you quote with numeric data, please be slow to tell clearly with naming properly a correct source.

I am a traditional lay judge who is new to judging. I'm very lay, meaning you should explain your arguments thoroughly while also being clear and concise. I will be voting off of whichever side leaves me with the strongest argument by the end of the round, defends their case while putting strong and extended responses on their opponent's case, and proves to me why their impacts outweigh that of their opponents.

No me importa lo que de mí se diga Vida usted su vida, que yo vivo la mía Que solo e' una, disfruta el momento Que el tiempo se acaba y pa'trás no vira Bebiendo, fumando y jodiendo Sigo vacilando de party to' lo' día' Síguelo, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh (¡Farru!) Síguelo, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh (de rola y pepa) Pepa y agua pa' la seca To' el mundo en pastilla en la discoteca Pepa y agua pa' la seca To' el mundo en pastilla en la discoteca Desacatao' Empastillao' (Qué maldita nota) (Arcoíris) ¡Fa-Fa-rru! Sube la' mano' y las botella' pa'rriba (¡blep!) Siempre la movie la tenemo' prendi'a Hoy vamo' a darle hasta que se haga de día Sigo rulitón en la mía Salió el sol, sol (sol) Prende la hookah y el alcohol (Y el alcohol) Y préndelo, oh-oh, woh-oh-oh (Woh-oh) Esto se salió de control (De control) Síguelo, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh (de rola y pepa) Pepa y agua pa' la seca To' el mundo en pastilla en la discoteca (desacatao') Pepa y agua pa' la seca To' el mundo en pastilla en la discoteca (empastillao') ¡Blep! ¡Fa-Fa-rru! (Qué maldita nota) (Arcoíris) No me importa lo que de mí se diga Vida usted su vida, que yo vivo la mía Que solo es una, disfruta el momento Que el tiempo se acaba y pa'trás no vira Bebiendo, fumando y jodiendo Sigo vacilando de party to' lo' día' Síguelo, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh (¡Farru!) Síguelo, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh-oh, oh-oh (de rola y pepa) Pepa y agua pa' la seca To' el mundo en pastilla en la discoteca Pepa y agua pa' la seca To' el mundo en pastilla en la discoteca Desacatao' Empastillao' (Qué maldita nota) (Arcoíris) ¡Fa-Fa-rru! Dimelo, Chino The Most Winning Victor Cárdenas White Star Sharo Towers La 167 La 167

I am a former PF debater, I am flow judge. Don't forget to Weigh arguments. I will flow logic arguments, cards aren't needed for anything.

My background is Extemporaneous Speaking as well as Parliamentary Debate with experience competing in and judging LD, PF, and some limited amounts of various other events.

LD -

As per my preferences, if you throw out philosophy, cite a source. I am generally familiar with most philosophers cited in LD so please do not inaccurately portray the views of a philosopher. Furthermore, in LD, the debator with the greatest grasp of philosophy will not necessarily win. For my purposes as a judge, it's all about how you use it. Fundamentally it is a debate, not a competition to use more philosophical references than your opponent.

PF -

I like sources, and I like calling out biased sources. If someone uses the Heritage Foundation or Slate, these places have agendas that they look to fulfill. Try to cite non-biased sources, or address this biases of your sources in your speeches. That being said, do not get bogged down in a debate on a singular source. I don’t enjoy that, you don’t enjoy that, it isn't debate.

Parli -

Cite sources and feel free to look up the sources your opponents cite in the round. Sometimes people misrepresent sources, and if you can see that and call it out you definitely will look good. Ask Points of Information, have every team member ask POIs if possible. Speak well, that’s one aspect of Parli that makes it such a unique.

Debate overall -

I do flow, and you will be judged on the flow. If you drop an argument without accurately rebutting it, you will lose that point. I wholeheartedly believe in lumping together points and cross-applying arguments, so generalizing arguments on many minute points is not only allowed, its recommended

Finally, have fun. Get points of clash. I don’t care what speech kids say, a good debate is as fun as any interp event that has you repeat the same maybe kinda a little bit funny HI every single week four times a tournament. Have fun, be respectful, and crack a smile every now and then.

I debated 2 years of PF at Fox Chapel in Pittsburgh, PA; currently debating BPD and CPD at the University of Toronto.

Include me in email chains: Boomba.Nishi@gmail.com

I will vote off the flow and what gets extended the cleanest. Tech over truth to an extent just don't be stupid about it.

FOR USC SEASON SPARKLE:

I’m one of the most flow judge you'll get at locals (not to toot my own horn). I’m not as fast as I used to be for flowing probably cap out at 200ish but test my limits at your own risk. Its local so I doubt you can go too far for me. I know what I say about offs below but I don't think there's a reason not to run k/thoery at locals. Rather, I'd almost encourage it as I think a lot of the harms these try to correct go unnoticed in locals simply because parent judges don't know how to vote for/evaluate these arguments so teams are afraid to run them. But that's the whole point right – to make positive change in the debate space. READ WHAT I SAY ABOUT DISCLOSURE. If I’m feeling goofy and there's no offence at the end of the round I’ll probably just flip a coin.

Voting Issues: Only losers use them.

No: Tricks.

Speed: I’m okay with some speed just don't go nyooooom or I’ll stop flowing.

Theory/Ks: I think theory and Ks are on net good ie. they push for positive change and create positive norms. I don't really care if it's a local tournament if you genuinely want to read theory/Ks to make this change I will be more than happy. Please do not read progressive arguments as an easy way to roll inexperienced teams. I never ran theory/Ks so I’m willing to vote off of them just not the most experienced evaluating them.

2nd Rebuttal: Preferably putting down some defence

Cross: Don't care, Didn't ask

Don't Be: Rude

Timing: Please time yourself, I will also be timing and stop flowing after 4 minutes. Feel free to ask what impacts/responses I didn't flow but I’ll probably just tell you.

Disclosure: I will always disclose unless like tab tells me not to and is sitting in the room. Not disclosing is stupid and not conducive to actually learning. Just hang out and I’ll either disclose or just think out loud what my thoughts on the round are.

Make judging easy for me:

-Signpost

-Warrant

-Weigh

-Collapse

-Cleanly Extend: Not just card names. If it's dropped it's donezo.

I enjoy some banter in speeches (this doesn't mean be mean) and big fan of thought experiments

I'll give +.25 speaks for chess or footie references

I was my school's debate coach for five years and have been judging both public forum and Lincoln Douglas debates during that time period.  I am now retired but continue to judge for my former team. 

While I am ok with speed, please do not spread and be careful that you enunciate clearly.  If I can't understand what you are saying, I won't be able to flow your speech and I will be frustrated at the end of the round. 

I do work my way down the flow and prefer that debaters argue in the order of the flow.  I do pay attention to dropped points but only if there is additional commentary on why the drop is important. Organizational skills matter so please go in the order that items were mentioned and try not to bounce around. If a round is close, I do consider voting issues to be a good way to break ties so please leave yourself enough time to include them.

I also expect all competitors to be respectful of each other. I will dock points for outwardly rude or arrogant behavior.