BCFL January Tournament I
2021 — NSDA Campus, BC/CA
Middle Public Forum Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideHello! I’m debated in PF for 3 years on the nat circuit.
If you don’t have your cases preflowed and make me wait 10 minutes for you to preflow it during the round, I will dock your speaks and be upset at you.
I've been prepping/judging this topic since June – I probably won't pay attention to cross sorry. If I'm not typing, I promise I am listening to your case I just don't need to write everything down
TLDR:
tech judge, all standard rules apply. My email is erica.chen0328@gmail.comfor the chain.
Safety > everything else. If you make the round unsafe for anyone in the round, you will lose. Run trigger warnings with opt-outs for any argument that could possibly be triggering. Trigger warning theory is probably an auto-win. I will not evaluate responses as to why trigger warnings aren’t needed/are bad.
Card names aren’t warrants. If someone asks you a question in cross, saying “oh well our Smith card says this” is not an answer to WHY or HOW it happens. Similarly, please extend your argument, and don’t just “extend Jones”. I don’t flow card names, so I literally will not know what evidence you’re referring to.
If you are planning on reading/hitting a progressive argument, go down to that specific section below.
Please don’t call for endless pieces of evidence, it’s annoying. Prep time is 3 minutes.
More specific things in round that will make me happy:
Past 210-ish words per minute I’ll need a speech doc. I also don’t want to read speech docs. It’s your job to persuade me in the round, not send me your prep. This is to say: if I can’t hear it, then I guess you lose.
Signpost. If you don’t signpost, I might not understand where to flow your response, or what it is responding to. And then I might not understand what is terminal defense/whether you frontlined your case appropriately/where your offense is, which might make you lose.
How I look at a round:
Whichever argument has been ruled the most important in the round, I go there first. If you won it, you win! If no one did, then I go to the next important argument, and so forth.
Understandably then - please weigh :) I love weighing. I love smart weighing. I love comparative and meta-weighing. Pre-reqs and short circuits are awesome. Weighing makes me think you are smart and makes my job easier. You probably don’t want to let me unilaterally decide which argument is more important - because it might not be yours!
Speech Stuff:
Yes, you have to frontline any arguments you are going for. And turns. And weighing.
Collapsing is strategic. You should collapse. If you’re extending 3 arguments in final focus…why? Quality over quantity.
You need to extend your entire warrant, link, and impact for me to vote on an argument. This applies to turns too. If a turn does not have an impact, then it is not something I can vote on! (You don’t have to read an impact in rebuttal as long as you co-opt and extend your opponents’ impact in summary). The same extension needs to be in final focus. Same with defense - everything in final focus needs to be in summary. If you say something new in final focus, I will laugh at you for wasting time in your speech on something I will not evaluate. I especially hate this if you do it in 2nd final focus.
The best final focuses are the ones that slow down a bit and go bigger picture. After listening to it, I should be able to cast my ballot right there and repeat your final word for word as my RFD.
Progressive:
If you read a frivolous K/theory/trick in order to not have to debate a structural violence argument, I will auto-drop you, give you 27s, and give the opposing team 30s. Then, I will ask the opposing team if they would like to go out and get some snacks and talk about their day.
Similar sentiments on reading prog on novices/young debaters because you know you can bulldoze them.
Disclosure/paraphrasing – I cut cards and disclosed open source. I don’t actually care super much about either of these norms. So like, go have fun, but I am not a theory hack. If you’re running ‘card clipping theory’ or ‘they didn’t disclose good enough’ I will probably think you’re a clown. In that case, I will default to reasonability. I am a judge so I actually do get to intervene :) I also won’t vote for first-3-last-3 disclosure because that is fake disclosure and stupid.
I learned the basic of Ks and hit a couple in my career;not super experienced with K lit. I’m open to them and will vote for you, just slow down and explain it, please. I do have standards on what Ks I will evaluate.
-
Identity/performances/talking about the debate space/explaining why the topic is bad = that’s all good.
-
If you run ‘dadaism’ or ‘linguistics’ I will be upset that you have made me listen to that for 45 minutes, and I’ll be extra receptive to reasons why progressive arguments are bad for the debate space; you will definitely not get fantastic speaks even if I begrudgingly vote for you because you won the round.
Trix are for kids. If I hear the words “Roko’s Basilisk” I will literally stop the round and submit my ballot right there so I can walk away and think about the life choices that have led me here.
I do not believe that you should run identity arguments on other debaters of that same identity. People shouldn’t have to debate their own experiences. If another debater expresses discomfort because of this issue in round, I will stop the round and you will lose for making others unsafe.
Frameworks:
Couple notes:
-
You need warrants as to why I should vote under the framework.
-
I’m down with pre-fiat stuff (aka you just reading this argument is good) but you have to actually tell me why reading it is good/I want your discourse to go into more rounds, and extend that as a reason to vote for you independent of the substance layer of the round
-
Being forced to respond in second constructive is stupid. If your opponents say you do, just respond with “lol no I don’t” and you’re good.
Crossfire:
Obviously, I’m not going to flow it. With that, I had lots of fun in crossfire as a debater. Be your snarkiest self and make me laugh! Some things:
-
I know the difference between sarcasm and being mean. Be mean and your speaks will reflect that.
-
My threshold for behavior in crossfire changes depending on both gender and age. For example: if you are a senior boy, and you’re cracking jokes against a sophomore girl, I probably won’t think you’re as funny as you think you are.
-
If you bring up something in grand that was not in your summary, I will laugh at you for thinking that I will evaluate it in final focus. If your opponent does this and you call them out for it, I will think you’re cool.
Speaks:
Speaks are fake, you’ll all get good ones.
If you are racist/sexist/homophobic etc I WILL give you terrible speaks. Every judge says this but I don’t think it’s enforced enough. I will actually enforce this rule.
Other than being awesome at debate (which I’m sure you are) here are things you can do to get some extra points:
-
debate well and have fun:))
Hi! I am a PF debater and a flow judge. Tech>Truth I have debated throughout my high school years, so speed is free with me. ENUNCIATE if you are using speed. I won't write down what I don't understand.
It is your job to weigh in speeches, and it is my job to judge you based off of that. If you give me no weighing, I can't really do the comparative analysis for you- the debate becomes bland and I give a decision that you might not be satisfied with.
Try to frontline in second rebuttal- respond to important turns at least. Moreover, since summary is now 3 minutes, you HAVE to extend rebuttals and frontline and WEIGH in summary. If it is dropped, then it is dropped. Do not try to extend or respond to something you dropped, especially in final focus. I am not going to count it, so it is a waste of time.
You can run theory and K's, but I have no soft spot for it. If it is complicated, explain it well or I am not buying.
Give off-time roadmaps or signpost, where ever and whenever you can. It is much easier for me to follow your speech. If your speech is all over the place, do not expect me to follow it.
I am super hands off when judging, so I won't call for a piece of evidence unless you compel me to call for it.
Please add me to your email chain, or evidence sharing doc using this email: yingying.fang.debate@gmail.com
Warrant your evidence! Don't just give me an empiric without any explanation! I value good analytics over cards, but cards obviously help a lot too.
I don't count prep for calling cards, but I do when reading them.
MAKE IT CLEAR WHEN YOU ARE USING PREP. Since everything is online, don't be sneaky! I can tell if something is off, and I will not be nice if I catch you in the act.
Collapse! Please narrow your speeches into the clashes and core arguments of the round. Drop unnecessary arguments and be strategic! If not, the debate can be become muddled and stronger arguments don't have the time to shine.
Time yourselves! I will give a 5-10 second leeway, but I will stop writing any new points after that period. To signal speeches past-time, you will be able to see my timer in the air, or a hand gesture pointing to my wrist.
I am more lenient towards new and younger debaters; don't worry too much about rules at this stage and just build basics! Always make sure to check feedback!
My facial expressions are very obvious, so if I look confused, then I probably am. Look to me in the round to see if I am following you.
I enjoy a bit of humor in speeches, especially puns, but don't be rude in or out of the round. I will deduct speaks for any derogatory language or discrimination of ANY kind; the world is already very melancholy, so be happy and kind debaters!
Just do your best! :))
heyoo ✰
- signpost
- frontline in 2nd rebuttal
- extend turns in sum
- collapse on 1 argument pls
- weigh
- plz no spreadinggg
- NO THEORY OR KS PLSSSS
- i stop flowing at 10 seconds grace time
i don't flow cross
time yourself
gl
I do debate.
Instead of doing a coin flip, you should turn on your camera and do a backflip. If you land it, I'll let you choose first. Extra 0.4 speaker points if you turn on your camera at all.
If your prepared blocks are literal building blocks, you get an extra 0.2 speaker points. If you enjoy playing golf then I'm taking away 0.1 speaker points.
I allow swearing as long as you're not rude to your opponent or to me.
If you can make me laugh somehow, you're guaranteed at least 26.7
If you're cocky then I'm taking away 0.7 speaker point. Arrogance ain't cool
Experience
I have competed in varsity PF and have 4 years of experience. Additionally, I've done other debate formats like CNDF and BP. I have a couple of bids and have qualified to the TOC for 3 years. Add me to the email chain: Hannahxu0320@gmail.com
Stuff
- Will vote tech > truth (to some extent)
- Won't evaluate anything in crossfire unless brought up in a speech.
- Frontline in 2nd rebuttal.
- Won't call for evidence unless you tell me I should. Nevertheless, cite your cards, and don't use sketch evidence.
- I'm open to Ks but not a fan of theory. I’ll evaluate theory if there is an actual rule break, but no friv. I don't want to hear anything disclo related (I debated for a small school :)
- I will only vote on stuff extended in the summary and final focus.
- Weighing >
- Signpost, please.
- Don't go for everything. Collapse on something.
- I'm fine with speed, as long as you are audible.
- Warrant your arguments and extend your entire link chain.
- Time yourself. I will give 10 seconds of grace time, but anything beyond that, I will not flow it.
- If you are rude, I will not hesitate to dock your speaks.
TLDR: I did PF in high school and did okay at TOC. I'm comfortable with any speed (unless you're an LD-level spreader, then send a speech doc) and argument you want to use (except K's, generally). If you really want, you can still run a K, but no guarantees I will evaluate it exactly how you want it to be evaluated.
More Shtuffs
- Tech > Truth. Run literally anything you want. Run human extinction caused by an alien invasion. It’s more fun.
- Grand cross is mostly pointless, but we still need to do it
- I do not flow crossfires. I don’t consider anything in crossfires. If it’s important, bring it up in a speech
- Anything not frontlined in second rebuttal is considered dropped
- Weigh. Please weigh. I’m begging you.
- I'm comfortable with theory, but not Ks. Just bear that in mind.
- Speed is fine. PF spreading is fine as long as you send a speech doc. I’m not comfortable with LD or Policy level spreading though.
- Everything in FF must be extended in summary. I refuse to extend anything for you. You need to extend the full link chain and impact
- When you and your opponent provide opposite warranting, give me a reason why I should prefer your's.
- I will only call for evidence after the round if you told me to do so explicitly
Send me evidence here: akirayoshiyama1@gmail.com
I am okay with speed but don't go too fast
I weigh on the arguments that are strong and get cleanly extended
I won't weigh on some shady arguments without good evidence backing them up
Please state your taglines for each contention clearly.
I don't flow crossfire, so make sure you mention all your points/ideas during your speeches
I'll give extra points if u shut down your opponents but not in a bad/rude way