I am a coach and a traditional type of judge.

Generally, while I don't mind a debater talking fast, I loathe spreading or spewing. I do not think there is any skill in just talking fast. If i cannot keep with your arguments in my flow, you risk losing the round.

In LD, because it is a value debate, I tend to focus on Value and value criterion in judging rounds. Your contentions should be connected to your value and criterion. I don't see a problem with counter-plans but they should be presented in the context to prove your value and value criterion.

In PF the winning team will have a well researched, well organized case. A strong framework is important, and the team that can show, through their evidence and their arguments, impacts will likely win.

I was in High School Debate, I graduated early so I wasn't able to do it my junior or senior year.

I will judge you based on how the debate is laid out. You will do a good job if I can understand what you are saying. Spreading is ridiculous, I can't even read that fast. I appreciate respect during rounds, if somebody has specified pronouns, abide. Please respect your opponents as they are only trying to debate. I truly love the motive you all have but if you cut any attitude, it resorts to show a lack of knowledge on the debate itself. You can prove you deserve the win without making your opponents feel like garbage.

All that aside, show me you know what you are talking about. I want to see that you are educated on the topics and that you can drive to believe that I should vote for your opposition.

Hi! My name is Josie Burke, my pronouns are she/her, and I did PF debate for 3 years!

Things I look for in a round are clash, professionalism, and evidence. If you don't say the author and year of a card, I will assume you made it up so please say those when you can. Be respectful of each other, and I know things can get heated in round, but please try and remain respectful of each other. As for clash, it is really important that you FOLLOW THROUGH with arguments, not just say "my card says X" "well my card says Y" and let it end there. Why is your card/point better?

I flow XX but if there is anything you want me to remember, please make sure to point it out during round. If your opponent drops a point I will have it on my flow, but PLEASE point it out. It is your job to note that and it shows that you were also paying attention.

I also keep time. If we all time there's less chance of us messing up, but let me know if you would like me to give time cues or anything, I would be more than happy to.

I don't do great with speed, I know should probably be better by now, but I'm just not :P If you do typically speak faster, it's not a big deal, but just let me know before you start.

Also, make sure to have fun! We're here to learn and become better debaters and if your opponent is making you feel bad or being disrespectful, let me know immediately. Also if you have any other questions, ask! I would happy to answer anything :)

Background:

-2 years in Public Forum Debate in Ohio

-Qualified for State Tournament both times

-Email: ellen.cheng@emory.edu

Judging Preferences:

-I judge off the flow

-I can handle fast speeds of talking, but please enunciate and speak clearly

-I value respect in the round. Don't be condescending, rude, or interruptive

-I do not flow CX. If you need to, include your CX point in your speech

-Off-time road maps are appreciated. Please signpost as well.

-I will only disclose when it's allowed

-Please keep track of time by yourselves.

-You may only run theory if the other opponent understands/runs theory as well

How I Make My Decision:

-I will vote for the team that weighs the best and also explains their weighing

-Please make sure your arguments interact with your opponent's arguments. If arguments do not interact, I will consider that contention a wash

-If you don't flow your argument through summary to final focus, then I will not use your argument in my final deliberation

-No theory. I don't understand it

Notes:

-I usually don't call for evidence, will only do it if necessary

Hello, My Name is Brigido Cruz, I like for the competitor be clear and loud as I may miss something, just speak up a bit. But for the most part I prefer you use the format that is comfortable with you. Please introduce yourself before speeches. And NO RUDENESS PLEASE, Let's be respectful and have a good debate.

I did policy and extemp for two years in high school and LD and HI my third year. I have been judging ever since then. Because of my experience, I flow like a policy debater.

I do not accept topicality arguments. There is never a good reason to have a topicality argument.

If you want to run a K, go for it. That being said, YOU HAVE TO RUN IT WELL. I have only seen a K run well in LD once, and a handful of times in Policy. So beware.

I am okay with speed, though I do not prefer it. You should be able to do everything without spreading though. If you look at past NSDA winners, they do it without speed. I know you want to go to the TOC, but listen, is it really worth it? The TOC comes at what cost?

I will prefer any arguments that have to do with leisure theory and workforce safety (OSHA). This is due to my education at the University of Utah studying Parks, Recreation, and Tourism, and Occupational Safety and Health.

In LD, there is nothing I hate more than a Value of Morality. You are smart kids, you can come up with something else. Morality is too ambiguous and everyone has a different view of morality.

I don't flow cross examination. If something happens in cross and you want it on my flow, bring it up in your next speech. THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT I DONT LISTEN TO CROSS, just that I don't flow it.

Please time yourselves. Y'all are adults, and I don't want to babysit. I trust you. That being said, if you clearly abuse this, I will stop flowing.

In all debates that I watch, I want to see civil discourse. That being said, I do want to see clash in the debate. Just be polite to each other, and we will all have a good time. If I don't think that you are being polite to each other, I will take away speaker points (even if you are clearly the better speaker).

Be civil. Debate beyond your case. As you debate, interact with and include all of the information brought up in the round. Speak clearly, and organize your arguments in a clear and concise manner.

Background: I have been judging speech and debate for the last four years. I have a lot of respect for the amount of research and time that goes into preparing and delivering a quality debate.

Style: I prefer traditional debate, delivered at a traditional speed, with value and criterion and clear contentions and subpoints. I judge the round based on your framework, impact analysis and flow. Please be very clear about the impacts of your arguments. Saying things like "the magnitude of my/my opponent's impact is x" will go far towards my understanding of the voting issues in the round. If your framework is complex, please explain it very clearly. The winner of the round will be the one who most clearly presented their side of the argument, defended it, and attacked their opponent's. I will flow with you, and will be tracking each of the arguments. My own opinions on the topic will never be a factor in my decision.

Speed: I prefer conversational pace. Rate of speed does not factor into my decision. If you speak too quickly, however, I might miss important elements of your case. Please signpost your contentions and subpoints slowly and clearly so I can flow with you. You can also share your case with me to help with this. My email is sharmilla@venturelearning.org

Cross-X and Voters: I appreciate good clash, especially in Cross-X (but do not be rude to your opponent). I do not flow this portion of the debate. If you bring up any points in Cross-X that you feel are good voting issues, please clearly state them in your follow-up speeches. Please do not bring up any new arguments in your final speeches-- I will not include them in my flow. I appreciate voters in the final speeches of both the affirmative and the negative. These should include not only why your case wins, but also provides the impacts of your case vs. your opponent's case. Signposting the attacks on your opponent’s case is also of value in determining the winner of the debate

Theory: If you are going to run theory, I need you to be very clear why your interpretation should be valued in the round, as well as the violation and the impact that it has on the round. I am not very familiar with debate jargon, so if you are going to run theory, please simplify it so I can understand.

Topicality: This will not be a major voting issue in the round. If something is clearly untopical, please mention it.

Respect: I enjoy good clash--heated debates are fine (and fun!), but please be respectful of each other. Comments that are homophobic, racist, sexist, or at all discriminatory will result in an automatic loss and poor speaker points.

I'm a first year head coach at Skyline High School. I have three experience as an assistant coach. I've mostly worked with speech events, but also congress and Public Forum with limited experience in Policy and LD.

Policy:

Overall: I don't believe I'm experienced enough to understand theory or be able to strongly evaluate Kritiks.

Speed: I'm OK with speed as long as you email me your speeches (tfhenry@granitesd.org) , but please slow down for your taglines.

RFD: I typically base my decision on the the stock issues of the plan on the Affs ability to defend it and prove that it is better than the status quo. The NEG wins if they can prove the plan is worst then the status quo or the status quo is better than the plan.

I judged many years of debate and IE events except policy. I can handle any speed but do not like the speed of progressive policy. Every event has its rules and structures, I like road map and framework, they help a lot to see whether the person or the team is sticking with their flow.

LD, l look for things that whether the value and value criterion line up with their contentions. Evidence credible or not. Speaker has the fire along their speech or argments but not sound yelling?

PF, team needs to know their topic well. Time management on speech whether things are well organized by FW or flow, evidence always important in PF. Wrong information under my knowledge, definitely out some points from me. Plan should not be spending time during in PF, it is not policy event. Speaker point should be high with high convincing tone and voice but not yelling.

Please do not spend time in rule argument, I want hear your opinions on the topic!

I prefer arguments to be clear and well reasoned, with strong evidence to back them up. I prefer a more traditional debate, without spreading/spewing. Your argument should be presented clearly with an emphasis on speaking clearly, slowly is preferred. There should be strong clash in cross. I'm pretty "lay" so adjust accordingly.

Do not talk too fast, if I can not understand what you are saying it will not flow it.

Keep in mind that I do not know anything about the resolution, please explain what you are saying.

Not a theory fan.

Lincoln-Douglas debate is value-based debate. Debaters should provide value clash. In a round where one debater provides line-by-line analysis of a case (but does not discuss values), while the other debater drops one or two arguments (but provides a cohesive and comprehensive value argument), I will choose the latter debater as the winner.

Public Forum debate is a team debate. I'd like to see teamwork and demonstration of equal participation between teammates. Both debaters on both teams should ask and answer questions during grand crossfire.

For any form of debate, when it comes to evidence, quality is much more important than quantity. I prefer to hear fewer pieces of evidence well-analyzed and discussed than many pieces of evidence cited in quick succession. The existence of a card is not in itself an argument. I can only judge arguments, so provide them.

My paradigm is good sportsmanship is key to winning. Please be respectful of your competition. Don't talk over your fellow competitors, don't roll your eyes or other rude gestures. Poor sportsmanship will cost speaker points and may be the tipping point for choosing the winner in a close contest.

I am a flow judge. I need signposting and don't drop arguments unless you explain why it is no longer relevant. Don't look at your opponent in round, specifically cx. Don't use gendered pronouns to refer to your opponents (use they/them or "my opponent/s"). Above all else, anything explicitly racist, sexist, xenophobic, transphobic, homophobic, ableist, etc. will not help your case--and depending on the severity I will stop the round.