Welcome to Speech and Debate! I competed in high school debate for two years and am currently competing in Speech and Debate on the collegiate level. In high school, I competed in Congressional Debate, Extemporaneous Speaking, Impromptu Speaking, Original Oratory, and Humorous Interpretation.

My credentials...

- I ended my career as one of the top 3 competitors in Congressional Debate in Mississippi.

- I competed in out-rounds at NSDA 2021 in Congressional Debate and P.O.ed on every level of competition.

- I was top 6 in HI at State Champs.

- I was State Champion in Original Oratory during the 2020-2021 MSHAA Debate Season.

- I STILL compete as a debater and speech kid!

Generally speaking...

- My pronouns are she/her!

- My email is madisonfbiggerstaff@gmail.com. Evidence? Loop me in! Questions? Don't hesitate to ask!

- Speech and Debate is an educational experience. Try to get something out of every round.

- Have fun! At the end of the day, the skills you acquire during your time as a debater are much more important than the trophies or wins.

For Congress:

- Clash with others in the chamber! Work to further the debate.

- Don't rehash! Bring up new points that haven't been introduced or attack/support points that were previously mentioned.

- Do NOT attack the speaker's personal looks or beliefs (unless you want this L).

- I love a good rebuttal speech. If you can demonstrate why the chamber should pass/fail a bill by addressing your opposing sides' arguments and take them down, I can tell you've been paying attention.

- PO will be in my top 8 if they are fair, clearly follow parliamentary procedure (there's wiggle room for a few mistakes, don't worry), and move the debate along. I'm looking for leadership! Being a PO isn't an easy task.

- Be yourself. Try not to give a "cookie-cutter" speech. I'm looking for originality and something that makes you different as a competitor. If you're yourself, you'll be your most confident and comfortable self. :)

For Public Forum:

- I can understand most competitors when speaking quickly. However, PF is supposed to be accessible, so tread carefully on spreading. If I cannot understand your contentions, it won't be flowed.

- Clearly define any terms in the resolution that may be interpreted in different ways.

- Defend your claims (I know, DUH). But, it is easy to get caught up in the main points of clash instead of dividing up your time appropriately.

- Use your crossfires appropriately. Don't waste any time.

- No long-winded questions/answers. This is interactive. Fair debates > Abusive debates.

Note: I'm big on no abuse in rounds. If you sound like Romeo during crossfire because you decided you must monologue, you aren't helping anyone (not even yourself). Even during your own speeches, there shouldn't be targeted remarks. Debate can be sassy, but shouldn't be disrespectful.

- Practice proper decorum and respect (unless you want the L).

- Explain it like I'm 12. If you can't tell me why I should vote for or against a resolution without using unnecessary jargon, I will probably default to the side that I understand better.

LD:

- My paradigm for LD is very similar to my paradigm for PF.

- Value and criterion are extremely important! Make sure you state these clearly.

Final Notes...

I don't ask for anything extra in rounds I judge. If I gave you a layout of how I wanted a round to go exactly, you wouldn't be your best self, competitor or not. I'm flexible. If you provide a good argument, support it without being abusive/rude, and do it with grace, you have a good standing in my books.

I have experience in LD, PF, and congress.

In debate:

Make sure you have a rebuttal to each of your opponent's arguments.

Be clear and try to signpost.

Practice decorum and be nice to each other.

I won't flow if I can't understand understand you, but reasonable speed is okay.

I will flow every moment of the debate and make my final decision on whose arguments still stand and have the largest scale and most practical impacts.

For speech:

Make sure your speech flows, and speak clearly and confidently.

I have been coaching debate, speech, interp, and congress since 2011. I am pretty open to most types of debate, but I have some specific requirements for the individual debates and overall.

All Debates

Flow: I am generally a flow judge unless the event dictates otherwise. For PF, LD, and CX I will decide my win based on my flow.

Speed: I am fine with speed. That being said, I do expect to understand your SPEECH while you are giving it. If your speed causes you to slur words, not be understandable, or go too fast to make the round enjoyable, I will take off speaker points.

Courtesy: I expect a level of courtesy from all debaters at all times. If you ask a question, let your opponent answer. I also expect those answering questions to not waste time and answer with that in mind. Any form of discrimination WILL NOT BE TOLERATED in argumentation or remarks to one another. I will give you the loss and report you to tab if you make sexist, racist, transphobic, homophobic, ableist, or any other sort of discriminatory remarks. Additionally, I expect you to treat your opponents with respect. Calling them "liars" or implying or saying they are a worse debater than you is not a way to get on my good side.

Abusive Debate: I am a pretty intelligent lady, so I expect you to refrain from telling me what is on the ballot and follow what is on the ballot in the round----you should win with your arguments, not weaponizing rules. Focus on the debate, not reading to me what the ballot says. I can entertain some theory debate, but if you spend the whole round on that and not debating the topic at hand (or actively K'ing it effectively), you've lost me. Calling your opponent abusive without providing substantial support won't win you anything in my book, but remember, you should be able to win on the merits of the debate itself.

Weighing: I appreciate the active weighing of impacts in rounds; however, I do not immediately jump to a nuclear war impact or extinction impact without CLEAR LINKS that the resolution will make that happen. We live in a world where those things are possible by just walking outside, so I need to see the WHY of these arguments specific to the debate itself. Weighing only works if there are links to those impacts.

Tech/Truth: I will be honest- I am more of a "truth" person. I believe in discussing real-world issues in the round. However, I appreciate tech arguments as long as they fit within the confines of the debate.

Evidence: Clipping or misconstruing evidence will earn you a loss.

Specific Debates

Public Forum: I expect good speaking in public forum and accessibility to what you are saying. Public Forum needs to be as much about analysis and rhetoric as it is about evidence. Do not run plans in Public Forum.

Lincoln-Douglas: I do expect some framework debate, and I do not think LD is a one-person policy round. There needs to be active engagement with the opposing side. I am not a HUGE fan of plans/counterplans in LD, but K’s are fine.

Policy: I am pretty much down for anything, but I expect you to engage with the opposing side. I am likely to vote on T, especially if a plan or counterplan is abusive. All that said, CX should still be organized and involve good speaking skills.

Big Questions and World Schools- I expect these to be respectful debates that resemble a conversation about the topic rather than an attack on your opponent.

World Schools (specifically)- In World Schools, this should look like World Schools- NOT POLICY. I will not entertain spreading, over-sourcing, or not using good style, strategy, etc. For prepared motions, I also will not entertain abusive debate that is so limited it is impossible to prepare for before the tournament. Do Policy if you like Policy that much.

Hi my name is Christian (he/him) and I am a sophomore on the Harvard CX debate team and did CX debate in high school as well.

ADD ME TO THE CHAIN -cagines21@gmail.com

my experiences

I am most comfortable with K/T/Theory positions. The kritiks i know best are afropess, warren, spillers/hartman of course, however, I've encountered most of the K lit base positions and am willing to evaluate them. Overall, just be sure to explain everything well.

Overview of Args

K v Framework (i dont really default any specific way - i will buy things like impact turns, and debate bad args - but i am also convinced by solid 2nrs on framework )

LARP v LARP - im fine for this but i dont do in depth research about the political implications of the topic - largely just the kritikal ones. keep that in mind while using jargon or abbreviations.

theory/t debates writ large are fine! i dont like friv theory however.

non t affs (esp w black debaters) are super dope and i love to hear them! i think these debates should be conscious about content warnings however. i expect good t-framework interactions.

my least favorite kinds of debate (pls dont make me evaluate these debates sigh)

tricks. full stop. :)

phil is a type of debate i dont know NEARLY enough about - it would be in your best interest to not go for a phil vs phil or phil vs policy round in front of me. however i know phil enough to evaluate it vs kritiks.

disclosure policies

disclosure is probably good, but i definitely air on the side of black debaters not needing to disclose their positions.

debate opinions (take them as you will)

1 - debate is not just a game. yes it is a competition, but it is also a place where POC, and black students express themselves. there are material impacts for black/POC - some of which can show themselves through trigger warnings - dont be violent.

2 - ANY form of racism, homophobia, sexism, ableism, lack of trigger warnings, etc -all of which WILL get you downed with an L-20.

3 - i default to competing interps, no rvi's, DTD - the more friv the shell, the lower threshold i have to beat it back. PICs and condo are probably good.

5- PLEASE SLOW DOWN FOR QUICK ANALYTICS. i sometimes find myself missing them, esp with the nature of this tournament being online.

5 - please weigh.

6 - other things that will result in you getting the L or/and lower speaks - misgendering your opponent, stealing prep, manipulating ev, reading pess as a non black person, being rude to novices!

things i like to see/good speaks!

1 - collapsing !!

2 - judge instruction

3 -make the round fun or interesting

notes

1 - being toxic throughout the debate is a no

2 - try and have docs ready to go - just so we dont run over time tm - other than that have fun!

3 - if you want to postround - try to keep it constructive! try not to be rude.

At the top, I would greatly prefer if you sent me case docs so I could follow along during round and easily reference arguments and specific cards at my leisure. Sending thosesusom.hait@gmail.comas early as you can before round it would be optimal. Outside of that, do include me in the email chain if one is made.

Throughout High School I competed primarily in PF on the national circuit. I went to NSDA twice in PF, was a State Champion in the event, and competed in multiple nat circuit tournaments.

Despite this, I don't really like theory and arguments of this nature very much. If you explain it well enough and make me interested I might vote on theory, but don't hold out too much hope. You stand a much better chance of winning if you stick to relevant on case arguments.

I have a pretty high tolerance for speed, but you need to make sure you're clear if you're going to speak at a quicker pace.

I also want to see frontlining occur in the right speeches. (this primarily means 2nd team rebuttal addressing the 1st team rebuttal and not waiting until summary to frontline) If you fail to address an argument at the right time and your opponent says you don't bring up a response, I'm gonna drop whatever argument was attacked without a second thought.

Most importantly, be civil when you debate. Don't try to harass your opponent, intentionally talk over them, or flex that you're some debate genius. Winning one debate round in high school isn't so big a deal where trying to fight the opponent in round. Debate is about discourse before anything else, so act in a way that best suits delivering knowledge.

For LD and Policy, most of the same things apply. Remember to be coherent with clear arguments.

I'm a graduate of Murrah High School in Jackson, Mississippi, and I've been participating in Speech and Debate for 4 and a half years. In that time period, I've qualified and participated in 3 NSDA National tournaments, 3 NCFL tournaments including placing Top 64 in World Schools in 2021, and Top 32 in World Schools in 2022. In my hayday, I was one of the top Lincoln-Douglas debaters in my circuit. I say this to say that I've heard a lot of different debate styles and arguments, and as a result, I'm comfortable with almost everything. However, I do have a couple of preferences:

1) Debate should be an educational experience (no discriminatory, hateful, or harmful language or arguments should be used, if they are, expect a loss). The goal should be to be polite and respectful of each other and at the end of the day, come out having learned something new.

2) Please no spreading. I have debated too many people that think spreading is ok in debate, it is not. Because debate is about communicating with the judge (which is me), the judge needs to be able to understand clearly what you are saying, and so should your opponent. If you spread, expect low speaks.

3) Debate preferences:

    Lincoln-Douglas: I am definitely a more traditional LD judge, so moral and philosophical arguments sit very well with me. However I've both debated against and debated with K's, picks, and tricks. I understand them, but I will say one thing, if you run them, ensure that you do two things: the first should be to help your opponent understand and engage with that argument. The second should be to know that argument yourself.

For LD

I'd like to see a good framework debate. Any sort of minor dismissal like, "my opponent's framework falls under the domain of mine." Unless it does of course, but it probably doesn't. Try to avoid fw like "structural violence" too silly for my tastes. Never liked it and it was never very good.

Give voters in your final speech. If your opponent does and you don't, not good for you...

Look at the judge during cx. If you don't, you'll get fewer speaker points.

Time yourself PLEASE.

A good debate will always be a good debate and a good performance will always be a good performance, so my opinion is irrelevant.

I’ve been here for a minute, and I teach this activity because I believe that communication is a critical skill. Your primary job as a debater is to be CLEAR and PERSUASIVE.

I typically accept things set out in arguments if they are supported by apparently-credible sources, if they make logical sense, and if I can follow the threads of reasoning. I’m politically agnostic in real life, and I believe that debate topics are written to have strong (winnable) arguments on both sides. You’ve gotta tease out what those things are and share them with me through an organized, methodical style that demonstrates your understanding of the topics and their themes and your consideration of your opponents’ positions. Look for the conflict and unpack it politely; that’s why we do what we do.

Should you be ships passing in the night, rounds will go to the speaker(s) with credible content, clear organizational structures, powerful poise, clearer voice, dynamic life, strong visual connections, supportive gestures, and appropriate delivery tempo. If you address the clash, the presentation skills will weigh less and the rounds will go to the speaker(s) with the more convincing analysis of the sides, the arguments, and the places where the concepts at play in the round butt heads.

Is this a paradigm? Idek. But it is what I want from you as a debater.

Fwiw, I’m also probably going to give you handwritten notes.

Hi all!

My name is Sarah Grace, and I'm a sophomore at Georgetown University studying International Politics with a concentration in Foreign Policy Processes and a minor in the Korean Language. If you're a junior/senior and you have any Georgetown-related questions, or questions about how debate can help you with the college application process, regardless of your school affiliation, I'm happy to help. You can best reach me at sgs100@georgetown.edu!

As for my speech and debate background, I debated all four years of high school. My three main events were Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Original Oratory, and Extemporaneous speaking. I'm the most experienced with Lincoln-Douglas Debate - I was both the 2021 State Champion and also competed at multiple national tournaments. I've competed in LD, PF, and Policy. I did OO sophomore-senior year, and I'm familiar with most speech events. My blind spot is interp.

This community has meant a lot to me, and I'm excited to be able to give back to it through judging, so I wish you all good luck!

Overall Notes

1.DO NOT SPREAD.

2.I will keep the official time, but you can also time yourself.

3. I give good speaker points, but you are only going to get a 30 if you were perfect in every way.

Debate Paradigm

1. No ad hom attacks/insults/slurs/etc. Be sensitive about the content you are debating.

2. You may give an off-time road map if you want.

3. I look for clarity, signposting, and solid logic in rebuttals. Please let me know WHERE you are and WHAT contention you are addressing. If you are addressing your opponent's first contention, please tell me so I can note it on my flow.

4. In rebuttal, give me impact calculus. Tell me how I am supposed to determine who has the more important impact (probability, severity, scope, magnitude). Please compare the affirmative/pro and negative/con worlds and tell me which one is better.

6. I like to see key voting issues that address major areas of clash in the final rebuttal speeches.

7. I can handle speed, but you need to enunciate. PLEASE DO NOT SPREAD.

8. If you use cards in rebuttal, don't just read them out, explain why it matters. Saying "Remember my Williams 2020 card" isn't enough. You should give me some additional analysis as to why it is relevant for your rebuttal.

LD Specific

1. I want to see value/value-criterion debate. Every contention should link back to the V and VC.

2. Give key voting issues in the 1NR and 2AR.

3. Logic-based arguments are fine. That being said, having evidence to back up your claims is also important. If you are saying something that is not entirely obvious, but pin it as "logic-based" I will weigh that in the round.

4. I will weigh the framework debate heavily if it is not collapsed, and if you do collapse the framework, you still need to make it clear what lens I'm judging the round through. If you win on framework, I still want to see solid debate on the contention level.

5. A bad CX won't lose you the round, but if you make a mistake/concession in CX and the opponent brings it up in rebuttal, I will weigh it.

Policy Specific

1. Please add me to the email chain. My Gmail is sgshurden@gmail.com.

2. I'm not super familiar with policy debate, so please make your arguments as accessible as possible. I need to understand what you are saying to flow it.

Congress

1. I treat Congress like a debate event. This means solid evidence, analysis, addressing other people in the chamber, and relevant questioning.

2. I don't like to see the SAME person stand up to give an aff and then stand up to give a neg right after. Pick a side and stick with it.

Overall Speech Paradigm

Dec, OO, Info

1. I'm familiar with Dec, OO, and Info. I know what the conventions are in each event, but in general, I will look for who the better speaker is.

2. Please don't judge how well you are doing based on my facial expressions.

3. Organization and evidence still counts. Even in speech. If I am confused about where you are, or the relevance of a point/piece of evidence, I will consider that when I rank you.

4. The speech I like the most won't necessarily be the one that gets the 1.

Extemp

1. Organization - The well-organized extemp speeches I've seen have a solid intro with a thesis, three points with several sources to back them up, and then a conclusion that links back to the intro.

2. Speaking - this comes back to who is the better speaker (inflection, tone, etc.).

3. Content - if you have 10 sources and they're all from the New York Times, I think you're probably making them up. Give me the month and year for each source. Ultimately, the analysis is more important to me than the source itself.

Impromptu

I look for most of the same things I do in extemp: organization, speaking, and content/analysis. Less emphasis on sources for obvious reasons.

Interp

I've never done interp before. If you get me as a judge, I have no idea what interp conventions are. I'll be judging on who I thought was the better speaker.

Hello! I'm Emma and I'm experienced in PF, LD, and interp events.

For debate, I don't flow cross and I appreciate signposting! Points dropped by both sides will never be considered when voting. Please be respectful of your opponents :)

emmateng.13@gmail.com

Hey! I’m Vineeth! I’m a retired high school speech and debate competitor of 4 years and am now starting my first year of my collegiate speech and debate season.

I come from a speech background (OO, Extemp, Info), but I've competed in almost every type of debate (PF, LD, Congress, World Schools), with the exception of Policy. Below are what I find the most important qualities for a healthy debate in general and specifics for each event.

Public Forum:

- Evidence and good analysis are key to good arguments. I'll appreciate points that have a reasonable amount of evidence and analysis to back them up.

- Must speak at a pace where I can understand you, if I don't hear your arguments, then I can't judge them.

- I do not flow crossfire, but I envision a good crossfire as having equal engaged questioning between both sides.

- I want clash in your arguments. It's one thing to present your case to the judge, but it's an even better thing to prove why your opponents are wrong. Any team that can effectively clash with the other team's arguments will have a better chance at receiving my vote.

Congress:

- Speakers: Must be clear, poised, and professional. In questioning I'll look for the speaker who can respond back confidently to questions.

- PO: My only rule for judging a PO is seeing how well they are able to lead the chamber through debate and whether or not they displayed bias to their school when picking people for speeches.

LD:

- The main thing I want to see in this event is tying your value and value criterion into your arguments effectively. The debater that proves to me why their value and value criterion are integral to the topic will most likely receive my vote.

- Just like in PF, I want you to clash with your opponents arguments.

General:

- Be respectful, any team that slanders the other and is clearly offensive will not receive my vote regardless of argumentation. Speech and debate is meant to be a safe place to advocate ideas.

- Coming from a speech background I think good speaking is just as important as good argumentation. Anyone who can clearly articulate their points will be received positively by me.

- Have fun, I get this is a competition and we all want to win, but this activity is more than that. Make sure you enjoy yourselves with this opportunity!

I am a PF debater who also has participated in Congress, Extemp, Impromptu, and Declamation.

For Debate events:

- Make sure to speak clearly and deliberately. Please refute & extend points in your later speeches - it really helps us decide who to win. Also, try to signpost (say which point you are refuting before you refute it).

- Please maintain decorum. I will drop you if you are rude.

- If an untrue point is brought up in the round, it is the responsibility of the other team to refute it. If this is not done, I will assume it is true for judging purposes, although I will critique any untrue arguments in the ballot.

For Speech events:

- Speak clearly and confidently.

For all events:

- Just relax! I know that's easier said than done but it will make your experience better. Also, remember to be respectful, and most importantly, have fun!

If you have any questions about the round, please feel free to reach out to my email: g.hayden.walker@gmail.com

Hey, I'm noa (they/them), a college freshman with 4 yrs of national debate experience under my belt.

Generally, if I'm judging you, I'm not gonna take your outfit into consideration. The norm of wearing suits kinda excludes those without an expendable income? So just look professional, but I'm never gonna dock you points for something out of your control. This also goes for a sore throat, stuffy nose, or lost voice. It does help to let me know before the round though. Also, if you need to leave after your speech, you don't need to ask me!! Trust me, I've been there, so I understand needing to leave for whatever reason.

Here's what u need to know (for debate):

• Above all else, be respectful, please. I will drop you (and your speaks) instantly if I hear anything hateful in your case, rebuttal, or any of your other speeches. Debate needs to be a space for people to express themselves, and if you take that away from those people, you won't be getting my ballot.

• With that out of the way, I'll buy any traditional argument (that isn't hateful, obviously) that is well-supported with evidence and plenty of warranting. I don't really understand progressive debate arguments, but I won't drop you for running them. Just read them slowly and make them make sense, because, despite four years in LD, I never fully grasped progressive args.

• Have all your sources ready in case they're challenged, just because it saves time.

• Cross-Ex isn't binding unless you make an argument that it is. IE - if your opponent concedes something in cross-ex, you need to point that out to me in a speech for me to weigh it in my decision.

• IF UR IN A RUSH READ THIS: To win, you're gonna want to write my ballot for me in your last speech. I'm a huge fan of line-by-line rebuttals, as I keep a pretty detailed flow, so if you point out everything your opponent drops, and that matches with my flow, that's all the more reason to vote for you. If you're going to collapse, convince me why I should buy it. In your final speech, please provide either a comparative worlds analysis and go deep into the impact calc, or at the very least give me some solid voter reasons.

• Also?? have fun. You're spending your weekend here, why not have fun with it? Be personable in your speeches, keep me interested, and make me care about what you say. Just don't yell at me (please). lol.

• Speaks are usually pretty ableist so I'll start at a 28 and will try and keep it in the range of 26-30. That being said, if you throw in a League joke or make a clever movie/anime reference, and I laugh at it, I'll bump your speaks up a point.

IF IM JUDGING POLICY, IM SORRY :(

send email chain to noaburnerlol@gmail.com

Courtesy, clarity, and connection. Please be polite, speak to make your points or performance clear to the audience (the judges), and (in debate) explicitly articulate the connection of your evidence to your point(s).

Speech & Debate is as much an educational activity as it is a competitive activity, so my comments will be focused on what seemed to work or not work within the context of what it appeared you were trying to accomplish.

I give only a brief paradigm here because I do NOT want you to attempt to tailor your presentation to a bunch of imagined traits and preferences I may or may not possess. Run YOUR case; give YOUR performance - I will judge and comment upon the presentation's face value to the best of my ability.