Hi there! I did Public Forum for 2 years and now I do Speech :)

Here's my email if you have any questions before/after a round or for an email chain for sending cards/evidence, haabo23@icstudents.org

Things I want to See

- Rounds should be about convincing me that your overall argument and position on the resolution is correct. Please keep in mind that's what Public Forum is, persuasion.

- Please signpost, (tell me what argument you're responding to or what overall contention you're talking about), it will help me keep track of my flow and especially use them when you’re extending cards (i.e. saying the tagline.) It will help me with my flow so please try and do it

- Weighing: Weigh the arguments in the round, ESPECIALLY in summary and final focus. Tell me why your weighing means you should win this round, not just why your weighing is true. Talk to me like I am a 3rd grader who doesn't know much about the topic and you're telling me why you're the best and not your opponents. (I assure you I know a lot about the topic, but pretend I don't)

- Impacts: Tell me why you have greater impacts than your opponents. If a debate gets really close, I will most likely decide the winner depending on who weighed the impacts better.

General Stuff to Remember

I am completely fine with off-time road maps, as long as you follow them.

Please time your speeches and prep, I will keep time, but it is also your responsibility.

I will allow you to have 10-15 seconds to finish your sentences at the end of your speech.

Please be respectful. Public Forum is also for everyone to have fun and learn. Respectfulness leads itself to better speaks. Any problematic behavior in the round (racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, etc.) can lead to a loss or docked speaker points. Watching a super aggressive/rude debate is also super frustrating and will hurt your speaks. I do not have any tolerance for any form of in round abuse or discrimination.

Please have a trigger warning for any content related to sexual violence, self-harm, or graphic descriptions of violence. If you're not sure if you should read one, read it. If somebody isn’t comfortable with you reading the argument, don’t. Usually, I'm okay with this kind of content, but please ask beforehand.

Speed

REMEMBER THIS IS PUBLIC FORUM AND NOT POLICY/LD. I can handle some speed but please don't spread, If you do, it's on you if I couldn't flow your speeches. If you have some speed, please also be clear when you speak, that way I can hear your arguments and be able to flow them. Clarity > Speed

Speaker Points

For good speaker points, I want to hear good tone, authentication, and speaking style. Being kind and respectful can lead you to better speaks!

(I will give you +0.5 speaker points if you make any references and I know of it, literally not joking) (Or if you somehow get food to my house, I'll give 30 speaker points to you)

(If you buy me any album off my album list I will consider giving you an automatic win and 30 speaker points)

29-30: Amazing Speaking

27-28: Really good speaking

24-26: Average/Okay

23 and below: Poor Speaking

Cross-Examinations

Use cross-examination periods to ask questions you genuinely want your opponent to answer. Listen to their response respectfully. Don't use cross-examination periods to make arguments, and please do not make me repeat this, please be kind during cross, I don't want to see any bullying or disrespect. (Also please do not be like Trump and Biden during the Presidential Debate, that was terrible.)

I want to see some clash. Clash is good, debate the warrants behind the other team's arguments vs. the reasoning behind your arguments.

Rebuttals

Please don't just throw a bunch of blocks and evidence at my face, use weighing, and tell me why your blocks make their arguments invalid. Please extend as well, that will seriously help you in your speeches.

Summaries

Try your best to not make this like a second rebuttal and do not just repeat everything your partner said in rebuttal. No new arguments in 2nd summary (it's abusive; your opponents don't have enough time to respond)

Final Focuses

PLEASE DO NOT BRING UP NEW EVIDENCE IN FINAL FOCUS. Final Focus is meant to weigh everything important that's happened in the round and to tell me why you should win, not to make new arguments.

Other

- Please try to not call me "judge"—it feels weird and cringy >_<|||

- You can refer to me as Hana (Pronounced as Hah-nah) or "You"

- Please stay on the topic and resolution.

- If I see any disrespect directed towards your opponents, me, or anyone else. Not only will I dock speaker points but I will also say YOUR BEHAVIOR IS SO UGH (extra points if you know where this is from)

- Make your arguments very clear to follow and understand, especially if you are advancing them. If your opponents do not respond, make sure to mention that in your next speech.

- Please do not lie! Also do not have any skewed cards, it's just downright bad to be lying and won't do you any good.

- Please do not cheat your prep time, I will be keeping time to be sure.

- If an argument isn't valuable in the round anymore, it's ok to collapse on something else in summary (but make sure to say "We're collapsing on __ because __")

- If someone calls for a piece of evidence, please give it to them as soon as you can. For online rounds, if there is a chat option just copy and paste the card, tagline, and citation there. Otherwise please email it to your opponents and me.

- Please be a good sport! These times are difficult to be able to debate like we usually would. Be kind to your opponents and judge. This also just isn't for me, but for everyone. Many people are working very hard to make these tournaments possible for you to debate and have fun.

That is all! If you have any questions about this please ask before we start the round, have fun and good luck! (╯°▽°)╯ ┻━┻

Iowa City West High School '23 | she/her | alicedebate3014@gmail.com

About me: I’m currently a varsity PFer; this is my 4th year of debate.

NOVICES: take everything below with a grain of salt, debate the best you can, and have fun!

General:

• "debate is a game" so tech>truth
• I will always disclose unless told not to
• Run what you want as long as it's warranted & has impacts
• Time yourselves
• Be nice
• If you bring me bubble tea before the round, +0.5 speaks
• Feel free to email or Instagram DM me if you have more questions after the round :)

Things I want to see:

• Off-time roadmaps & signposting
• Trigger warning if your arguments could be sensitive
• Start frontlining in 2nd rebuttal
• Weighing, especially in summary and final focus
• Interaction (aka actually RESPOND to what your opponents say, don't flow through ink)
• Collapse, don't extend stuff you know you can't win
• Collapse STRATEGICALLY - aka don't go for the contention/argument that has 8 responses to it (unless you're prepared to/have time to frontline them all), when you could go for the one that has just 2

Things I DON'T want to see:

• "Bruh homies out here having an asthma attack while reading cases." Don't spread. This is pf. If I miss something you say, that's on you. (If your opponents spread, feel free to run anti-spreading theory)
• Don't read frivolous theory
• DONT READ PROGRESSIVE ARGS IF YOU KNOW YOUR OPPONENTS DONT KNOW ANYTHING ABT PROGRESSIVE PF

• "asking" statements, instead of questions, during cross
• New arguments in final focus or 2nd summary. This is abusive; your opponents don't have enough time to respond.
• Bringing stuff up in final focus that wasn't brought up in summary (I won't vote on it)
• DON'T just read card after card. You need to analyze in between and explain how they prove your point
• Discrimination

I think speaks are very subjective, but here you go:

30: God-tier - I see you definitely breaking and making it into deep out rounds

29.5-29: Great - You're breaking for sure, might not make it far, but you're breaking

28.5-28: Average - Might be on the verge of breaking/will be in a bubble round

27.5-27: Comprehendible

<26: Either I can't understand you at all, or you were egregiously rude/discriminatory

link to one of my favorite pf rounds ever!

Evidence-supported topicality is a key to my vote. Avoid exploding the topic just for the sake of shock value--if you've honed your skills, the strength of your argument will win over gimmicks. Being organized is another important factor; the better I can follow your lines of reasoning, the more likely I am to vote your way. Confidence is great, but arrogance can be off-putting.

Judging: I have, thus far, only judged PF rounds. That is my comfort zone.

Speed: I can follow faster presentations, but if I miss a contention because I was taking notes on the previous contention, that's on y'all.

Numbers: I don't require facts, figures, and statistics. However, if one team uses them, cites them, and defends their validity if challenged then they will have an advantage over a team that does not. This being said, if these numbers accidentally reveal that the other team outweighs on magnitude, or probability, that's also on y'all.

Unconventionality: Original (strong) arguments are appreciated and effective. They have to make sense and they have to be supported by evidence. They also have to be relevant.

How I weigh: Beyond simply proving your point, I focus on whether someone's contention has been neutralized/negated/disproven/minimized (or demonstrated to be non-unique). I tend to favor probability over magnitude.

Warrants/Technical Arguments: Linked to unconventionality, if you make an argument that requires technical knowledge, you should try to briefly explain it. Also, if the feasibility/reality of a claim is not readily apparent, the warrant should come with a short explanation as to how it makes sense.

My preferences for judging a debate are: 1) That debaters not speed spread, if I can't follow your arguments it's hard to persuade me. It also makes for a better Public Forum debate if everyone can follow the main arguments. 2) That crossfire be cordial, being rude and/or cutting a speaker off will lose you points. 3) I prefer that your evidence support your argument, not that it tangentially might apply. I also an extensive background in speech and debate as a high school student and as a high school Speech & Debate Coach and a speech Judge.

I did primarily PF for 4 years and now coach a bit. I studied political science and international relations and now work in state politics. I'm a very average flow judge.

add me to the email chain and label the round morgandylan183@gmail.com

Flip, pre-flow, and get ready as fast as possible, don't wait for me to get to there.

PLEASE do not go more than 5 seconds over time or prep steal, call your opponents out if they do this

Don't shake my hand

I evaluate the round: first, by looking to framework, then, if there is none, weighing to see where to vote. If neither occur, I look to what's left in final focus and whichever team has the cleanest link into their impact. I default to probability, then scope. I’m open to why I shouldn’t do any of this.

Speed: I do not want to have to follow along in a doc, be understandable. I flow on paper, I can keep up pretty well. If you are going really fast, look to see if I am writing, and adjust if I'm not

Evidence: I expect all evidence to be in cut card format and ready to see when asked in a few minutes at most. If it is misrepresented I'm docking speaks, but it must be called out in a speech for me to strike it from the flow. Non-highlighted cards are a BIG no.

You can paraphrase if you have cut cards but properly explain each argument, I will not get blippy args on my flow and I shouldn't have to.

General Preferences of Arguments

quality over quantity (collapse on your offense and defense)

Tell me why I should prefer your analysis/warrant/evidence, etc. Resolve the clash!!

Frontline at least turns in 2nd rebuttal, anything in final focus needs to be in summary, besides more comparative weighing

I love tons of warranting, smart analytics, good knowledge of your evidence and real-world stuff, and making up sound arguments on the fly that you can defend well.

Progressive Arguments

I'll listen to and vote off anything BUT I strongly prefer substance debates and I don't care. BUT If there's legitimate abuse I kind of understand how to evaluate theory. I'm not that familiar with K's or any other progressive args. I do know I strongly prefer topical K's.

With progressive debates, I am a lay judge. Slow down and explain everything more. I require sending speech docs for these.

Speaks: I range from 27.5-29.5, nothing crazy. More commonly 28-29, just do what I talked about above and you'll be fine. I will doc speaks if you do not do things I specifically ask, i.e. slowing down during progressive args.

I love being asked questions and helping you learn!!

I don't really know what I'm doing but have fun lol

Clarity > Speed

If you get a good point in cross-fire don't forget to include it in summary and final focus! I won't make my decision off anything from cross-fire directly, but if you get a good point and include it in summary and final focus you might secure da bag.

Cereal then milk

Weigh stuff!! It'll make you win fr fr

Don't be rude have fun! ^_^

Speaker Points

30 - fire speech

29- pretty good

28- good

27- ight

26- meh

25 or below- you have lots of room to improve!

I'm a senior and have been a public forum debater for three years. My pronouns are she/her/hers.

Please add me to the email chain: my email is cayan23@icstudents.org.

If you have any questions about the round, my decision, or debate in general, please don't hesitate to ask or email me after the round :)

Things I want to see:

- Warranted arguments that are extended w/ impacts: for me to vote on an argument, it should be extended throughout all speeches

- Off-time roadmaps and signposting (!!) 

- Weighing/voters in summary & final focus

Things I don't want to see:

- Lying: I don't like intervening so please be transparent and direct

- Rudeness: I will likely dock speaks

- Discrimination: your speaks will nosedive and I may drop you.

Speaker points

- 30: v good; expect you to be among top speakers/teams in the tournament

- 29-28: pretty good; expect you to break

- 27-28: average; you may break/be on the verge of breaking

- 25-27: not bad

- Below 25: you were discriminatory/lied/extremely rude :(

- Will add 0.1 speaks for each tasteful roast of Alice Doresca, Ben Kleiman, or Andrew Dong

Miscellaneous

- I can handle pretty fast speaking but keep in mind that I have never debated/judged ld/policy

- Theory is ok when warranted/not frivolous

- Bonus speaker points for humor & good vibes

- Have fun :D!!