email: aa4688@columbia.edu

about me

hi my name is ayaan (pronounced "ah-yawn"). i'm an undergrad at columbia. i debated pf @ brooklyn tech hs for three years. i have very much been out of the competitive debate scene for the past year and a half. i'm like 20 years old, im not a real adult yet, please don't call me judge.

basic norms & round decorum

have your own timer, but my clock supersedes all; avoid massive card shuffling; do not steal prep from your opponents.

if road maps help you deliver speeches, feel free to give them, but i'm neither here nor there to their value.

arrive to the round on time, preferably if you can get here early, please do. starting early means we end early.

please be respectful at all times. this includes avoiding the use of harmful language and ad hominem attacks (avoid logical fallacies in general). practice empathy, communication, and kindness. please feel free to pull me aside if you are feeling uncomfortable for whatever reason.

i might ask for your cards if they're outlandish. the parameters of what outlandish means to me are dependent on the case. just be ready to share them if requested.

if there are any technical/logistical issues, please let me know before the round starts.

round spectators are fine, just be quiet and respectful.

i will disclose if a) required b) both teams request that i do. i will also attach a link to my flow in the rfd.

i'm not heavy on writing essays in the feedback section, if you want details on your performance, you're more than welcome to email me.

speaks allocation is pretty round-dependent, meme cases get 30 speaks (for the meme) but i don't vote for them.

i'm pretty monotone and boring, so i always appreciate a joke or two in speeches to lighten the mood.

core evaluatory philosophy

tech > truth always, and i am not super versed in progressive argumentation, but i have taken a western philosophy seminar, so i think i'll survive.

please cut your cards properly, i cannot stress this enough. poor card cutting destroys the structure of my flow and lessens my opinion of your arguments.

if there is intense evidence clash, your job should be to explain to me why your evidence is better.

the second rebuttal should ideally respond to the first constructive and first rebuttal.

if you do run non-frivolous theory

my ideal shell: interpretation -> violation -> standards -> voters -> implication.

respond to the violation in the speech immediately following it.

the key to winning my vote -> a fantastic summary

the summary is the most important speech in the entire debate (especially the first one). it's also one of the hardest speeches to master, so don't beat yourself up over it if you're struggling. in an ideal round, i should be able to listen to just the summary + ff and make the correct decision.

the core formula for a good summary:

• pick the best offensive and defensive arguments to extend (this also means collapsing on stuff that didn't work for you).
• gain access to the offense that you choose to extend.
• make an argument about why that offense should win you the round (aka weighing).

(more details are in this lecture)

picking arguments to extend

• choose arguments that weren't responded to / poorly responded to by opponent (easy to access).
• choose arguments with large impacts (easy to weigh).
• consider how all of your arguments fit within the context of the round (generic advice, takes practice).

gaining access to offense

• frontline: respond to the responses to your argument, you must do this for *all* active responses to your argument. a common structure for a frontline is the "they say ... we say ..." format.
• extend: now that you've frontlined your argument, restate your cards and explain the jist of the claim again, must extend link + impact.

why you should win (weighing)

• comparativeness is your friend. directly compare your offense with your opponent's offense and explain why yours is better. please have warranting for your impacts (nuke war prereqs the economy is not as solid as you might think).

additional info: how to extend

• the easiest way to extend is to just give a short tag on your card and explain why it supports your claim
• practice practice practice extending your arguments before the round!

final thoughts

• summaries are very hard to master, but they are formulaic and can be executed successfully with enough practice. i believe deeply that most flow/tech judges will be convinced of one side after the summary, and without a good summary, the final focus is bound to be weak.
• without adequate knowledge of your topic, all the advice above becomes relatively trivial. come prepared!
• remember that you need to extend throughout your speeches all the way to the ff.
• don't get too stressed out! debate may seem like the end of the world, but the grass is greener on the other side. have fun, argue with passion, and make the most of it.

1. Contentions should be clearly laid out. (Ex. My first contention is...) This makes it easier for both me and your opponents to follow along with your case.

2. Please try not to spread (speak too quickly). I need to be able to understand your contentions in order to take notes.

3. I need you to have strong evidence to back up all claims. I prefer statistics and numbers over anecdotes.

4. Please be able to give your source when asked.

5. It is important that you have a strong impact and that you prove to me why your impact is more important than your opponents'.

One last note: please put the name of your school and which side you will be debating in your name. If you are comfortable, please add your pronouns too.

I’m a parent judge who has judged PF for four years. This paradigm was influenced by my son. I flow important points throughout the round.

Preferences:

1. Have both warrants and impacts backed up by evidence in your case. Carry them through the round if you want me to vote on them.

2. Do comparative weighing in summary AND final focus, this is important. Don’t use buzzwords.

3. If you want me to vote on an argument, it must be in summary AND final focus.

4. Don’t speak too quickly. If I can’t understand you, you won’t win my ballot.

5. Be respectful, especially in crossfire, or I will dock speaker points.

6. No new arguments in final focus, they will not be considered. Bring them up earlier in the round so your opponents can respond to them.

7. Have all evidence ready to show your opponents. Don’t take too long when evidence is asked for.

8. Signpost throughout your speeches. This also includes short offtime roadmaps. It makes it much easier to flow.

9. Clearly explain your arguments in each speech, do not just assume I have a prior understanding of every argument. I do some reading on the topic before the tournament, but I am by no means an expert.

10. Don’t run progressive arguments (Ks, theory), I don’t know how to evaluate them.

Speaker Points (adjusted based on division):

<26: Very poor OR offensive, rude, tried to cheat, etc.

26-26.9: Below Average

27-27.9: Average

28-28.9: Above Average

29-29.5: Great

29.6-30: Amazing

I am a senior at Bard Queens. I have been debating for the past seven years. I mainly do PF but I have parli experience as well (World Schools and AP).

I am good with speed but you should be coherent. No use making an argument if judge/opponents cannot understand what you're saying. This is not policy.

Aff needs to prove that their side is better than the status quo and they need to provide solvency. Neg has to prove that there are serious disadvantages to voting aff. Please please please extend your arguments through. Don't just repeat your arguments in final focus, that's a waste of time.

I won't flow cross but I will pay attention.

I am going into a round with a blank slate. Tell me why your impacts matter. Explain your links. I will follow an argument if it is explained well but you should do the heavy lifting for me.

I like progressive debate but I am unfamiliar with most kritik literature so you have to explain it to me. (I also wouldn't recommend running prog args at a local tournament but whatever floats your boat.)

Be kind. Debate is supposed to be a fun activity so enjoy yourselves! If you disclose or if there are any evidence email chains, loop me in: hope.dworkin@gmail.com

Currently a PF debater at Brooklyn Technical.

I'm a flow/ tech judge, so make sure everything you think is important is clearly stated.

Speed is completely fine as long as it is comprehensible and not spreading.

I am totally fine with theory cases.

I will not flow cross, so if you want something you said in cross to be flowed repeat it in your next speech.

Please signpost during your speeches.

Summary/FF should not ignore important points from the round but focus on impacts.

In evidence clash make sure to assert why your evidence is better, otherwise I will card at the end of the round and decide for myself.

Finally, I know the rules of PF inside and out so if you are worried about your opponent breaking any guideline just let me know after round or during your opponents' prep. I'll ask you to tell me when you start and stop prep, and also make you prep while reading opponent's cards, if you called them. Please time your own prep, but I will keep track as well. I won't flow new evidence in second summary or either FF's, so don't feel pressured to evidence brought up late in the round, although you should address that they brought up new stuff in your speech.

I will try to give you very detailed RFD's and if you have any questions let me know!

Current PF debater at Brooklyn Technical Highschool

I am a flow judge and pay close attention to weighing and framework.

Speed is fine with me, but make sure you speak at a pace where I can still comprehend what you are saying.

Crossfire is your time to poke holes in your opponent's arguments. I don't flow crossfire, so if anything important is mentioned that you want me to flow, mention it in the speeches to follow. If you are disrespectful during crossfire, speaker points will be deducted.

In rebuttal speeches, make sure to signpost and go down the flow. Giving an off-time road map will be helpful, as long as you follow it throughout the duration of your speech. Anything that goes unresponded to will be extended through on my flow. Also, do not just read cards or taglines, rather tell me how they respond to your opponent's contentions.

Summary and FF should mirror each other. Make sure to be clear about the biggest voting issues in the round and WEIGH. In these speeches, do not go for everything. Collapse on your most important argument/ warrant. Any new evidence brought up in either of these speeches will not be flowed through.

I will keep track of your prep time and speeches, but I will not give time stamps, so I suggest that you keep your own time.

Debate is meant to be educational and fun. With that said, if you have any questions, my email is: eeppel6564@bths.edu

I am currently a PF debater at Brooklyn Technical High School.

Speed: No spreading. Make sure I can understand EVERYTHING you are saying.

Evidence: Put any evidence that comes up in the chat. Everything that you say should be backed up with evidence and if you are called out on a card and it doesn't match what you said it will be droped. I will look it over if needed. I will only flow through evidence that is extended.

Speeches: The second rebuttal should have frontlines. In summary, don't forget to flow through everything from the round that you want me to extend. Anything that you bring up in FF that was not extended in summary will be dropped. Make sure you weigh as much as possible.

I do not encourage theories.

A new judge, that loves debate. I prefer not extreme speedy delivery.

I have been doing Public Forum for about 4 years, and I was the Novice Director at Brooklyn Tech. Overall, I love judging and I really do enjoy giving you feedback on how to grow as a debater.

If you do disclose please email me your case, it makes it easier for me to flow the round and decide who should win the round, my email is nabila.hoque2004@gmail.com.

1. Theory: YES. I love it when people run theories. However, you have to realize you're fighting an uphill battle since many judges won't know how to evaluate that. I, however, am bored and get excited about interesting arguments. The well-argued theory makes for interesting debates. This, for example, is how you call people out on rulebreaking - don't just say "it's illegal/not allowed," make it an argument with impacts.

2. Card-calling: I believe that being able to call for a card is an important strategic tool. That means it should be used, get this, strategically. You should have your cards ready and it should not take that much time to get it, however, if you are taking a long amount of time I will start running your prep.

3. Crossfire: Crossfire is your time to clarify. Don't expect me to write any argument you make during crossfire because it won't happen. Instead, follow up on strong points during your next speech. Finally, resist the urge to engage in shouting matches, it will definitely cost you speaker points and is a terrible use of everyone's time.

4. Attitude. If you are rude to either your opponent or me I will deduct your speaker points and if your attitude is off the charts I will give the other team the win regardless of the flow. Overall, be nice.

5. Rebuttals. Signposting is something I want to see all throughout the debate, however, in rebuttals it is key. I like off-time road maps and I expect that you should follow your off-time road map during the speech. I also want a logical and concise analysis of the faults of the opponent's argument, not just "this card says otherwise." Tell me why their argument is faulty and why your argument is better.

Speaker Points

30 - If you run a good meme case/if you speak with an eloquence that can only be personified by someone like Barack Obama/Best speaker in the tourney in my opinion.

29 - If you speak really well with minimal error.

28 - Good job but you can use some improvement.

27 - You need improvement, but it's only an upward climb.

26 - There's a lot of room for improvement. Don't get down if you receive this from me. The debate is all about improvement, and if you attain this score then I will definitely give you tips on how to improve and better yourself in the verbal and digital feedback.

25 - Why are you here?

24 - If I have to go down here then you should go to policy/LD/Parli/Anything that isn't PF...

I debated Public Forum for 4 years.

Most important: Please collapse and comparatively weigh your argument as early as possible! The more arguments I have to evaluate, the less likely you get the decision you want

Some specifics:

- Frontline ALL offense you plan to go for in 2nd rebuttal (and don't go for too much!!!). You can expand on frontlines in 2nd summary, but they should all be in rebuttal.

- Extending = explaining/summarizing your argument, not just reading the tagline

- I will evaluate K's and theory arguments but don't assume I know common jargon

- Content warnings are mandatory for potentially triggering content

- Misconstrued evidence will significantly lower your speaks even if it isn't important for my decision

- Skip grand cross for 1 minute of prep if both teams agree

- Be nice to each other and have fun!! I don't flow crossfire and the nicer you are the happier your speaks will be :)

Ask any questions you have about the decision if you want - it helps me improve as a judge. As long as you aren't rude :)

I am a public forum debater at Brooklyn tech. I will flow everything, including important points made during crossfires. Speak well, loud, and clearly for speaker points. I don’t mind spreading and because it’s your speech you can do whatever you want. Weighing impacts throughout the round, tangible evidence, and link chains are the biggest factors in a debate so clearly emphasize them. Ultimately whichever side has stronger evidence, impacts, and extended points will win. Note to not drop any points or else they won’t be counted on my flow.

I am a flow judge. if you want me to consider a point in my RFD, you must state it cohesively in your speeches and ensure that you bring up important points. if it’s not on my flow, i won’t consider it.

speed: i’m all right with speed as long as you’re speaking legibly and i can comprehend your words enough to note them down. i don’t see any benefit or reason to spread but if you do, it’s your choice. remember, you’ve to win the judge over, but if they can’t understand you, there’s going to be some problems.

evidence: statistics > anecdotal/theoretical evidence. your argument must be supported by sourced evidence consistently. don’t simply state an argument and expect me or your opponent(s) to buy it. if asked for a card, you must be able to provide. if you ask your opponent for a card, the time you take to view the card will be deducted from your prep time.

*REMEMBER TO SIGNPOST* begin your speech by saying “my framework is...” or “contention 1...” it makes it easier for both the judge and your opponents to flow your case.

i love seeing active clash during crossfires. be quick on your feet and attack your opponents, defend valiantly, and win every single battle. you might not win the round for being able to handle crossfires well, but you will be rewarded with good speaker points.

Currently a PF debater at Brooklyn Technical

The most important thing to be aware of in my round (and any round) is that you will immediately be dropped from the tournament if you say anything sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. Please be aware of the way you speak to your opponents. For whatever reason, sometimes debaters think being condescending is a good strategy. It’s not. Your speaks will be dropped if you are guilty of that.

Speed - I’m totally ok with speed as long as it is comprehensible. If you fear that it’s not, please send a speech doc. I also encourage sending a speech doc anyway because it makes sure that debaters with internet issues are not disadvantaged.

Evidence & Speeches - I only flow what you say in your speeches. I will watch the crossfires but I will not take notes of any kind. As for evidence brought up in the round, I prefer empirics and the least amount of paraphrasing as possible. If your opponents do not call out an issue with your evidence, I will flow it through onto your side. Please provide analysis & warranting with any cards you use. Pointing out faults in arguments is useless without some kind of logical analysis. Do not assume that I will use “common sense” to make decisions for you in the round. Everything you want and don’t want to be flown through needs to be explicitly stated.

Please make sure all of your arguments have links. I will flow arguments with messy linkage through, but it will be much easier for your opponent to convince me to drop them. Additionally, anything brought up in FF that was not extended in summary will be dropped.

Tech over truth.

Theories/K’s - I actually enjoy hearing these when its beneficial to the debate space, and not a ploy to win. Feel free to run it.

Weighing/Impacts - This is what I am going to make my decision off of. The team that does it better wins the ballot. If neither team weighs nor impacts efficiently, I'm forced to decide based off of who I think has the stronger arguments. I really don't want it to come down to that, because it requires judge intervention.

I am open to sending my flow/ further reasoning for decision if you request it.

Currently a PF debater at Brooklyn Technical High School (2018-2022).

TL;DR: Just debate good.

Strike me:

- If you are _____-phobic or _____-ist. This is an automatic drop for me. I don't care how much you are winning on the flow, making the debate space safer comes before substance.

- If you don't cut cards properly. If I want to evaluate a card, I don't want to cut it for you mid-round.

- If you steal cases or prep from other teams without asking.

Speaker Points:

- I'll generally inflate speaks if it's an important tournament because I don't want my biases or preferences to decide your seed.

- Speak clearly, although you can safely get away with spreading if you send a speech doc.

- It's impressive when you can outsmart your opponents rather than speak better than them. If you can do something big brain, speaks go up.

- I don't care what you do in cross. If you can make me laugh, speaks go up.

- If we ever go back in person, bringing me snacks is an automatic 30.

Extensions and Weighing:

I will automatically assume that any points you don't extend after second rebuttal are dropped and I expect that you collapse on at least one argument during your summary. If you expect me to vote on random points that you gave throughout the round or a rebuttal to your opponents' contention, that will not be convincing enough for me. I'd rather have a fully fleshed-out argument or fully fleshed-out turn to your opponents' argument to vote on rather than fragments of reasons why your side is better.

Make sure you weigh effectively and convincingly as early as possible! If you were losing the whole round but win on weighing at the very end, you have the round right there.

Evidence:

What ever happened to debaters talking about the credibility of sources? You don't necessarily have to mention it in round, but be wary of what sources you use and call out your opponents' sources if they're faulty. If I end up calling for the card at the end of the round because you didn't explain it enough, trust me, I do not care if your uncle wrote a shady article in the New York Post about extinction being imminent, I will vote it down.

I would prefer the least amount of paraphrasing as possible to avoid falsifying the sources you use. Imagine that the author of the source is listening to the round; they should generally agree with you, not shake their head in disappointment. Never assume that I will use logic or make decisions by myself, you must tell me everything that you want, and don’t want, me to flow through.

Speech Formatting:

I expect the second rebuttal to include frontlines to arguments brought up in the first rebuttal. I'm down for whatever strategic method you may have in terms of organization, but summary (especially second summary) is the most important speech in the round so make sure that it effectively explains the position you are in and why it is the best position to be in. As most judges say, your final focus should be my RFD, try to make me think as little as possible by the end of the round. Stay away from bringing up new evidence/arguments in both summary and FF as your opponents will call it out and I won't flow it through.

I am all good with theory debate and progressive rounds as long as you can make them work in the CONTEXT OF PF DEBATE.

I'm a relative newcomer to the world of debate, so any arguments that are done at a speed that an average human would struggle to comprehend, I might also have trouble following. Arguments that clearly highlight the impact are particularly important. During crossfires, I really appreciate questions that allow your opponent to actually answer meaningfully, as opposed to critical statements with a question mark at the end (i.e. "You proved that your argument wasn't valid... don't you agree?"). I keep time and expect you to do the same.

vivek yarlagedda

I am a tech judge.

I did public forum debate in high school (3 years ago).

If you see me suddenly stop flowing, it's because you are speaking way too fast.

Don't be mean/rude/disrespectful or use any hurtful/discriminatory language!

Hi I'm Jason.

Former Public Forum Debater of 4 years-

Be respectful and nice to each other, it's just a debate round.

I'm not the super serious judge you may find in other places but I am also not the judge that knows nothing.

I will try my best to give the most feedback to each team in hopes that every round you compete in, you'll learn something. Have fun! It's a great privilege to be able to participate in activities like these. Debate and public speaking can really go a long way in life.

"You learn more from failure than from success. Don't let it stop you. Failure builds character."

I am a Varsity high school debater for Brooklyn Technical High School.

I value clash of evidence on cards over speech sills; however, do not overspeed in constructive.

I appreciate a well-cadenced and smooth constructive by both Speaker 1s. Speaker points will be awarded off of valid remarks that leave the opponents stumbled.

You may keep your own time, but my time is empirical.

I will not extend or flow anything in the case unless explicitly mentioned in the round. For any dropped arguments, please notify me to mark it down and explain its importance. I do buy into the argument where they dropped their cards that is why we would win off of our flows. I look well for a complete and whole "weigh" off of summary and final focus speeches rather than some technicality win.

Speak Scale:

24- You need to re-think what you did in this round

25- Please work on your case immediately

26- You are starting your debate career. The upward climb from here

27- Work on your speaking skills

28- Good round, average speaking

29- You can speak very well and will go top 10.

30- You are winning this tournament