I was a PF debater in high school and American Parliamentary in college. This paradigm is very PF-centric, but some things apply for any debate round.

Evidence: I don't want a round with just cards being rattled off or arguing over sources (feel free to call out bad sources of course, but I will not be happy if all of cross is just arguing back and forth about cards instead of the real topic). I'm happy with a certain amount of logic being used over evidence when fitting. Don't shy away from making logical arguments solely because you don't have 12 cards to back it up. Further, just because you do have a card and your opponent doesn't have one does NOT mean you automatically win the argument- if they can effectively argue that your card is completely illogical and nonsensical and you can't adequately defend it, it's not going to go your way.

Please do not misrepresent your cards or cut them in a deceiving way. If you do that, it will be a huge knock on you.

Speed: I'm fine with speed as long as you're not completely spreading.

Weighing: Please, please, PLEASE weigh. You might be throwing away half the arguments you focused on in your speech if you are not weighing them. Clash and weighing are some of the most essential parts of debate.

Respect: I have no tolerance for rudeness; if you are extremely condescending, scream over opponents, never give your opponent a reasonable opportunity to respond in cross, etc, I see it as a reason to drop. Treat your opponents with basic respect and don't be racist/homophobic/etc. Don't assume your opponent's pronouns.

Timing: I will time you and stop flowing after about a 10 second grace period. You can ramble on for an extra 50 seconds or whatever, but it won't get flowed by me so it serves no purpose. If you start going way over time, I will cut you off. Please time yourself, though. I will get annoyed if I have to do this and it can hurt your speaker points. If there's a reason you can't time yourself, no big deal- just let me know and I will be happy to give you hand signals or whatever you need. It won't bother me as long as you let me know!

Sliming: Do not introduce new arguments in final focus. I will be paying attention to what's new and totally ignoring all of it.

Cross: I don't flow cross. I pay attention, of course, but if you make a good point in cross, you need to discuss it in your speeches for it to count on the flow.

If judging LD, I will be unfamiliar with lots of the phil, so just be sure to clearly explain your framework!

If you have any other questions before the round begins, please feel free to ask!

Respectful, clearly articulated debates.

Overview

My name is Jacob Lantzman (he/him). I competed in Public Forum for all four years of high school while also dabbling in Policy Debate, Parliamentary Debate, and World Schools Debate. I competed in PF, Policy, and World Schools debate at a national level as well as Parliamentary debate on a state level. I am a relatively open judge, I will go for anything that you ask for me to go for, but you need to be able to defend it well both logically and statistically if your form of debate dictates such. If you look below, I give specific paradigms for each form of debate, but I'll highlight a couple of general key paradigms for me:

- I am not afraid to drop you on civility, or lack thereof. Debate is a great place for civil discourse on some of the most topical resolutions in current events. It is paramount that you are civil and polite to everybody involved in the round (your partner, your opponents, your judges). Throughout my time debating, I faced a fair share of debaters that were bullies in round and were incredibly uncivil. There is a difference between passion and lack of civility, it's very easy from a judge's perspective to see the difference. I don't care if you have the best constructive, best cards, best rebuttals in the history of debate, if you're uncivil in round, I will not hesitate to drop you.

- I am not going to keep track of your time for you. Keep track of your own prep time and speech time. During the round, I want to play the least role as possible so that I can focus on judging you all on the content of the debate to my full ability. If I am judging you for a larger tournament either on the circuit or national events (NSDAs, NCFLs, etc.) then I'll keep track of your time for my own purpose so that I can stop flowing after your time has expired, but I'm not going to stop you from speaking, that is your responsibility. If you are at time and you're in the middle of a sentence, I have no problem with you finishing your thought.

- Most important of all, have fun. This is an incredible extracurricular activity and has helped me throughout my educational and personal careers immensely. Enjoy the time you spend researching and debating because it can be a lot of fun.

Public Forum

- Framework: I am happy to go for any sort of framework that you throw at me. I was a big framework debater and I think it's the most underutilized aspect of Public Forum debate. Use the framework as a way for the judge to evaluate the round. However, this is not Policy or LD debate and I do not support a progressive approach to Public Forum debate, if you don't know what that means then it most likely does not affect you.

- Constructives: Structure your constructives so I know when you move from one contention to the next and can clearly flow that. Structure is a great tool to keep the debate organized and keep it from getting too sloppy.

- Cross Fires: Be respectful, let your opponents answer your questions. I've seen it all too often that a team will ask their opposition a question and then never give them the chance to answer the question without interrupting. I will dock you speaker points and potentially drop you if you continually interrupt your opponents in a rude and disruptive way. The same goes for not letting your opponents speak, the crossfire is not an opportunity for you to grandstand and have another speech in the round, it's so you can find the clash in your arguments. There's no clash if one team talks the whole time.

- Impromptu Speeches (Rebuttal, Summary, FF): Give me an off-time roadmap. I want to know the order of your talking points in your speeches so that I can follow along on the flow. Structure is so important for judges to flow the round.

- I'm not going to drop an opponent's argument just because you tell me to or because they didn't bring it up in a speech. This can be one of the most frustrating things to deal with as a debater, but as long as you don't just bring it up in constructive and not bring it up again until final focus, I'm still going to flow it.

I've been judging for the past 3 years on the local level (Western PA).

My judge paradigm is limited only by what I can understand, because I don't really have any preferences concerning how students should debate or how the round should play out. If you take sufficient time explain your arguments then you can do whatever your want. Speed is fine as long as I can flow (can follow the slower end of what is considered "spreading" but not ridiculous speeds). Still debaters should preference clarity over speed. If a point is especially important, slow down. Succinct, clear points in the voting issues helps me complete the flow (or absence of flow).