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).

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!

It is important to remember that debate is supposed to be an educational activity that will better prepare participants to be more critical in their thinking and be more able to convey that critical thinking. In rounds, you should speak clearly and coherently, so your arguments can be understood and flowed effectively. It makes the round easier for all parties involved. If I miss an argument you bring up in your speeches, I can't rightly determine if that argument has an impact on the round as a whole.

On to more technical aspects, the framing of the round is essential. The AFF must show that their arguments are topical, and that the framework they propose is reasonable to the resolution. Pertaining to this, arguments should support the framework. For example, if you are going to run a framework that looks at levels of freedom as your weighing mechanism, I will not vote on an argument that states that your advocacy produces economic benefit without a link between those two arguments.

It is up to both sides to argue. The judge is supposed to vote on what is said in the round, not what is implied. If your opponent is being unfair or abusive in the round feel free to call them out, insomuch as you have a reason or impact as to why that particular behavior damages the validity of your opponents position. Give the judge clear impacts on your arguments so that it is easier to support your side.

Just keep the debate clear, clean, and coherent. Other than that, feel free to use whatever arguments you want to make.

If needed:

bryantgsaunders@gmail.com

Background: I am an experienced debater that has competed in different events but specifically competed in public forum. I know the rules and expectations for every round. I was my school's debate president, I understand how debate works.

What I value in the round:

Clash - The winner of the round will have EFFECTIVELY attacked EACH of their opponents contentions. During cross examination, there should be clash in questioning. I do NOT flow cross ex so if there is something important that happens, bring it up in your next speech. Clash should be about the actual information in the round, NOT about sources.

Speaker Points: In order for me to rank you as a good speaker, there must be clarity, good volume, and confidence in the information you are speaking about. Be confident but not arrogant.

My pet peeves in the round:

Respect - Respect is very important to me. If your opponent is hogging cross ex, feel free to cut them off but do it respectfully. Be aggressive but not rude. If you use an ad hominem fallacy at your opponents, you will lose the round.

Rule/Source Game - This is probably my biggest pet peeve. I am totally fine if you ask your opponents to see specific evidence in their case but don't make that the focus of the round. Also don't play the rule game, if a rule is broken you can mention it but I can tell if a rule is broken. Counter plans are not allowed in PF and if you use one, you probably aren't going to win.

The main thing I look for in a good speech is how it furthers debate by either building new evidence, expanding upon a point already made, or respectfully refuting a piece of evidence or conclusion already made. A strong debate is also well organized and easy to follow, and includes the necessary context and back ground information needed to understand the argument being made with little knowledge of the topic. Ideally debates will also be presented in a way that is engaging to listen to.

Please don't spread. If I can't understand what you're saying, then I can't tell if you're making a good point or not.

Please be kind. Avoid being unnecessarily nasty to your opponent.

I am very experienced in debate, so do not be afraid to use as many debate terms as you want to use. Make sure to attack all of the points and defend your own.