Sophomore at Princeton debating British Parliamentary and did 4 years of PF in HS.

fawazahmad@princeton.edu if you have any questions.

Overarching things:

Tech>Truth: All of us can pretty much agree, most of the arguments we read in PF are bs so I evaluate the round solely on what's presented in the round regardless of the truthfulness of the argument. But remember the more sophisticated your argument gets the lower threshold I have on evaluating responses.

Frameworks: I default to a cost/benefit analysis framework. If a team provides a framework for me to evaluate the round under it should be introduced as early as possible and extended throughout all speeches. Introducing a framework in second summary is FAR too late. If there are two frameworks please do the comparative for me and explain why I should pick one over the other.

Comparative Analysis: Please do the comparative for me with different arguments. If both teams are running similar arguments do the comparative and tell my why yours is better. If teams are running different arguments (ie one is an economic impact and one is a democracy impact) I need to know why I'm preferring your argument. Absent comparative analysis, I will have to interpret things on my own and you don't want that.

Extension: Extending only the authors and taglines of cards doesn't suffice for me. You need to extend the substance of the card as well and how they relate to your impact. If you want me evaluate something in FF it should be included in summary. I usually allow first speaking teams to extend defense straight to final focus but in reality you should be mentioning important defense extensions in summary.

Progressive args: I don't have that much experience with progressive arguments. I don't like theory debates but will tolerate them. Run these types of arguments with caution. If you run them with me explain them really well in round.

Misc:

-I will not flow cross. If something important happened in cross mention it in speech.

- When time stops, I will stop flowing. Anything said over the time limit will not factor into my RFD
- Quality over Quantity; don't spread. If you plan on speaking fast please send a speech doc. If I can't understand you I'll say clear and after 3 times I'll stop flowing.
- Second rebuttal should respond to turns/disads.
- Please collapse on a few arguments in summary. I prefer quality over quantity and clear extensions.
- Weigh, weigh, weigh (as early as possible in the round)
- Implicate turns and defense

- Please don't miscut (I will drop you)
-There's nothing more I hate than long speeches in cross.

-Please be nice people in round and don't run arguments that are harmful to a group of people

GLHF

Hey y’all! My name is Fikir Beyene (she/her) and this is my fourth year in speech and debate. I’ve competed in various events including PF, Congress, and Extemp. As a judge, my final decisions on every round come down to unique issues or moments of excellence, but here are some general things I take into consideration:

• I try my best to enter each round with an open mind, so even if one team’s argument may not be true or “correct,” if the other team doesn’t rebut it properly, I will weigh it as part of my decision
• Do not spread. A slightly quicker pace than your normal speaking speed is okay, but I value well-articulated arguments almost as much as I value strong argumentation.
• If you are blatantly disrespectful or discriminatory to your opponents, I will drop you.
• Please make sure to signpost to make your speech easy to follow.
• I will flow until you go more than 10 seconds over time (in debate). If I hold my fist up and you keep talking (beyond finishing your statement), I will not take any of the extra evidence/arguments presented during that time into account.
• In interp events and declamation, I will most highly rank those who display a mastery of the piece (very little to no pauses to recall information), include well-incorporated transitions and movements, and perform with unforced emotion.
• In impromptu, I’m looking for logical argumentation, cohesive speeches, and an engaging, effective delivery.  
• In extemp, I will most highly rank those who cite multiple, strong pieces of evidence, present well-developed arguments, and effectively infuse humor and anecdotes into their speeches.

If you have any questions about your ballots or any of the events, feel free to email me at bfikir2005@gmail.com. Good luck! 

I have done policy debate for 3 years at St. Andrew's Episcopal Schools.

Just have fun and be respectful to your opponent.

Hello, my name is Kareem Elgohry. I have experience with basically every type of debate, although primarily Public Forum.

I am tech > truth TO A POINT. If you run something nonsensical like 'death is good', I won't immediately vote you down, but I will heavily scrutinize your arguments/links--more so than if you just ran a normal case. (high impact low probability is completely fine)

It is incredibly unenjoyable to sit through a round where the debaters are spreading just to get as much information out as possible. Focus on building a cohesive narrative and strong argumentation instead.

Theory Shells are fine, but keep them relatively tame.

By default, I will weigh impacts to decide the winner of the round. If you're looking to win in a way that doesn't revolve around cost-benefit analysis, please make that clear in your frameworks and rebuttals/summaries, and give me reasons for why it outweighs all other impacts.

As always, please be courteous and practice decorum -- nothing makes it harder for me to vote your side than disrespect. Lastly, have fun.

Hello! My name is Anna (she/they). I was a high school debater for 4 years competing in primarily PF, Worlds, Poetry, and Informative Speaking. I have also experienced and have knowledge in Congressional Debate, Prose, and Duo Interpretation.

My goal as your judge is to make sure that you feel comfortable, are able to take away something important from the round, and have fun! As such, feel free to contact me about any questions you have through my email (annakang613@gmail.com).

Now, here is some important judging criteria for the following events:

Overall Comments for Debate:

- Please speak a bit slower. This allows me to write as much as you want me to judge. Refrain from spreading if you can, and I'll note in the round if you are speaking too fast for me to write. I want to at least get as much as I can to properly judge.

- If you go overtime in your speech, know that I won't flow from that point. Additionally, just know you are keeping yourself from ending the round earlier than you would be.

- (Just my own little pet peeve) I will want you all to refrain from saying, "my opponent made a mistake" or anything that sounds like you are directing comments to your opponents. I want you to focus on the arguments, not directing the mistakes to the opponent. This won't change any differences in points, but it might just be a little thorn on my side throughout the round.

PF:
This is a debate that needs evidence but most importantly elaboration and ability to translate that evidence to your argumentation. I don't want the debate to be based on spreading and ultimately getting confused on what the opponents are arguing. Make sure you are speaking clearly and clarifying your argumentation along the way to win the round. Here are some other things I want you to note:

- I need you to weigh. I am going to heavily emphasize on the fact that I want to see the summary speech be used to not only clear up some misunderstandings, but also be the key deciding factor of the weighing aspects of the round.

- Argumentation should be carried throughout the round. From rebuttal, to summary, and finally final focus. If I don't see that trend, then I can't carry your argument until the very end. Make sure to collapse when you need to, and plan accordingly so you don't get overwhelmed at the end. It makes it easier for me to judge as well.

- I will not be flowing cross. I will still listen in and see how you all act during that time, but I will only flow the content that was taken from that time if you bring it up in your other speeches.

- I will default to a cost/benefit analysis framework if none are given at the beginning of the round. Please make sure to provide argumentation as to why your framework should stand if you are going to provide one. If your opponents are able to adequately answer to it or negate the reason for why we need such a framework, then I won't consider it.

LD:

TBH, I sadly don't know much about this field. All I know is that you have to substantially provide evidence for your value and criterion with your contentions. Follow the comments above if I am your judge for LD, and I will do my best.

Congress:

If I ever judge this, just know that I want to see professionalism, funny remarks, and good speeches. I also really appreciate good questions, since this tells me you are paying attention.

Policy:

I don't know much about this debate form as much, but I will do my best to follow, so bear with me as I try my best. You guys have lots of time in comparison to other debate forms, but I understand the feel and need to fit more information during that time as well. Make the debate not as a speed-race for how many words you can get in, but I would like to see the arguments getting thrown back and forth and engaged with by both teams. Similar to my points in PF, I will judge most of the arguments based on those particular points made above.

Worlds:

If I ever judge this, I can provide more specific comments after round. Most importantly, I want to see teamwork and flowed argumentation throughout the 3 speeches. I love to see how future speeches will respond to the ones that happened earlier and provide answers to certain substantives. Clever remarks and team lines will also give extra points from me.

Overall Comments for Speech:

- Show how much you are passionate for your topic and event. This can differ from each event, but if I see that particular enthusiasm for the topic, you can definitely pull me in and keep me on my toes.

- Speak clearly

- I will provide hand signals and give you ones that I think are necessary for that particular event. If you have specific signals that you would like, feel free to ask me to do them! I have a phone timer for that reason :)

- If you have any more questions, feel free to ask before you begin!

Hi, I’m Neely! I use she/her pronouns. Please inform me of your preferred pronouns (if you’re comfortable) so I can address you properly. I competed in speech and debate for 4 years in a variety of events, primarily speech and debate events. I will not tolerate any kind of ad hominem arguments, hate speech, slurs, charged language, etc. Make sure your arguments are clear and understandable to all, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!

I'm a chill person, I've done 3 years of public forum debate, so that's what I'm most familiar with.

For PF:

- Speak clearly, give good warranting, extend your arguments and defense, and weigh.

For LD:

- I like warranting and logical arguments.

Overall stuff:

- Be confident, be nice, and speak clearly, I'll give high speaks. I'm relatively okay with speed.

- Aaron and I have started a Fantasy Football team this year for the first time (I don't watch football, nor am I interested), and we're going 0 wins, 3 losses in the league right now, so we desperately need some Fantasy Football tips. Does anybody know if T. Hilton is going to do well, or should I play it safe and keep Sammy Watkins in the lineup?

Contact:

yuandrew923@gmail.com

Public Forum:

- I've been doing PF for 2 years, so I'm relatively experienced.

- Try to compare your arguments with your opponents' so that it is easier for me to evaluate the round.

- I'll probably give you good speaks as long as you don't speak super fast or anything.

- Be nice :)

- Have fun!