-Please speak slow enough to accommodate the new online system. If you begin to spread, you may get cut out if you have a poor connection...It is far more valuable that I hear all of a shorter case than part of a longer case.

-Please do not assume that I have all of the cards that you have (I probably don't have any at all). If you quote a source, I prefer that you reference it later on by addressing the impact of the source, rather than simply last name, year and moving on.

-I have experience in Public Forum, but not much in Lincoln-Douglas or Policy. That being said, if you use too much technical jargon, I may not understand what you are trying to argue.

-This should be a given, but I WILL NOT tolerate derogatory behavior of any kind. I understand debate gets heated, but you need to remain courteous.

-I will appreciate any unique arguments you can come up with, so long as you can make the link and extend it through the whole round.

Hey guys, I'm Alayna, I'm a Senior at Cabot High School. I am very professional and I know what I am doing when it comes to debating and I will do my best when I judge.

RESPECT: If I see that you are disrespecting your opponent, it will be an automatic L. This is one of the key components of debate. I DO NOT TOLERATE disrespect.

ALL STYLES OF DEBATE----Time keeping: MAKE SURE YOU USE ALL OF YOUR TIME!!!! Using all of your time is very important, when the timer goes off STOP it's ok, just make sure that you get majority of the things in that you want to get in.

Spreading: I'm okay with it.

Framework- This is important so use it, depending on the style of debate. If you want me to vote on your side because of your framework explain to me why.

Definitions- These are very important in all styles of debate so use them.

Line by line: This is very important in every style of debate, without this it is harder for the judge to know what you are rebutting against. This makes it easier for me and for you as well.

Road Maps: This is very important in every rebuttal speech, giving this will help me and your opponent writing in the flow.

I will not listen during cross ex, this is strictly for the debaters. This is where you clarify any questions that you may have and this is also to make trap questions. This part in this debate will be judged. THIS IS STRICTLY FOR YOU GUYS!!!

IPDA:

This is practically the same as LD but the topic varies obviously.

Use all of your time also keep your time!

Use all of your prep time before the round because it is the most important part of your case.

Spreading is fine if you know how to do it correctly, If you don't know how to then don't spread.

If you have any questions about anything this is my email:

adinealayn24@cps.k12.ar.us

Jackson Crumpler (He/Him)

Cabot High School

PF/Congressional Debater

Hello! I'm currently a junior at Cabot High School, I've been debating competitively for two years now, and I enjoy it so much! I ask for a smooth round, bringing your prior knowledge of debate and your usual debate style. However, if you're looking for specifics and what I prefer please read below for what I encourage, discourage, and things I am looking for in different events.

Encourage and Discourage

I, personally, am an aggressive-style debater. I enjoy clash, love rebuttal, and adore great utilization of the cross-examination and questioning periods. However, with that being said, please do not be overly aggressive to the point that it interferes with the round. Meaning, don't excessively talk over your opponent, ESPECIALLY when you asked them a question; let them answer entirely, and if you have time left, give a follow-up. I want you to show your aggressive style in the form of confidence and composure: responding to the opposition's points thoroughly with great evidence and reasoning. 

Also, please announce your contentions, warrants, and impacts when speaking. Make sure your impacts weigh more heavily in magnitude than the other side, preferably with numerical data. More so, please announce your turns and what contention you are turning when speaking. It helps with my flow, allows me to make a better ruling, and makes your case look better prepared. I'm okay with spreading, but make sure your argument isn't being lost with it, slow down at the important parts, it helps with speaker points.

Contain control of the round: make a good weigher and good voting issues, otherwise, you leave me with a more liberal interpretation of the round, could hurt you could help you, but in doing weighing and voters it shows to me a better-developed case.

Tech>Truth, please be sure to signpost.

Any homophobia, transphobia, racism, or xenophobia will result in an automatic loss. More so, disrespect towards your opponent dramatically hurt speaker points, but I am willing to be more lenient of your reduction if you apologize after the round (depending on how rude you were) because I understand you can sometimes get lost in the heat of the moment.

Congress

Make sure I remember you, don't fall into the background. Continually ask great, RELEVANT questions to ensure I don't lose you and have a good parliamentary procedure. I love rebuttal-type speeches at the end of the bill/resolution, so if you give a good one you're definitely high in my ranks. Show great speaking skills in your speeches and that you're knowledgeable on the subject you're debating, don't give a speech just to get a speech in. Make sure when people are questioning you that you remain confident in your answers, and repeat lines in your speeches if you already covered the question they're asking. When you are questioning other speakers, don't continually speak over them. I don't like rehashing, if you're doing a constructive make sure you either introduce new points or add on to previous points. 

Public Forum

Constructive should have well-established contentions, with great impacts. I prefer a weighing mechanism for the round that is touched on at the beginning, but I don't necessarily need definitions if they are not needed, as they cut into valuable time that could be spent building your case with contentions. Spreading is fine, but I prefer it less in the constructive because this is when you should be developing a good case, and any missed points interfere with the nature of the debate.

Rebuttals should be made with a signpost where you say which contention you are responding with, helps with the flowing of the round. I am okay with spreading in rebuttals. Make sure not to drop any arguments, but please be considerate of well-developed turns, don't start responding to an argument when you have only twenty seconds left because you will most likely not include enough rationale and warrant in your turn. Go over the first cross-examination period if you can.

Summaries should incorporate both a rebuilding of your own case, where you highlight your most valuable contentions and how they have failed to refute said contentions. The rest of the time is where YOU MAKE SURE to weigh the impacts of both sides, and how your side has greater impacts.

The Final Focus should incorporate the voters and the final weighing of the round, why the scale is on your side. Preferably three voters that deal with the structure of the round: dropped points, impacts, etc; this is where speaker points can lean towards your favor if you end with a good analogy or something.

IPDA Debate

Refer to what I prefer in constructive rebuttals for public forum. Affirmative, please be sure to give me a framework/weighing mechanism at the beginning of your speech because it helps not only me with my judging, but also you by giving you more control over the round. Also, be sure to use your questioning period effectively. You should ask questions that you can use for your own rebuttal speeches, but clarification questions are okay. I don't care as much about sources as I do creatively developing and grounding your arguments. Have a fun round, IPDA is meant to be fun. 

Lincoln-Douglas

I evaluate this based on the framework. It is important to have a value and criterion. I need to be able to understand what you are saying. 

~

Anyways, have a good round. Don't be too stressed or nervous, you got this!

Debate success doesn't matter! Have fun and do what you love! Be a good person!

Hello! My name is Anna Dean (she/her). I will default to (they/them) if I don't know you.

Bentonville West High School '21 (AR) | Harvard '25

I currently debate at Harvard. In High School, I did: Policy (Bentonville West DR FOREVER.), Extemp, World Schools, a little bit of Congress/ LD.

If you are racist/sexist/homophobic/etc I will vote you down, end of story. Your rhetoric and how you treat your opponents matter.

TL;DR

Put me on the email chain: annadean13@gmail.com

Time yourself.

Do what you do & do it well.

Speed is fine (in CX/LD) (slow down a bit online & emphasize clarity)

Truth over Tech

If you read 40 cards in the block = fascism

I love a good cross-ex :)

Win an impact.

Number your args... please.

You have not turned the case just because you read an impact to your DA or K that is the same as the advantage impact.

Don't clip cards.

If you're unclear I won't yell "clear" I just won't flow well...

Updated 2023: DO NOT GO FOR THEORY. Don't read tricks. I don't buy the bs. Win your arguments without tricking your opponents.

I do not like disclosure. I won't vote for it. You should be able to win without knowing exactly what your opponents are going to say(can't believe I have to even write this)

Policy:

KvK:

I like them if they're well done. I should say, I don't have immense knowledge of theory. I ran Fem, Fem Killjoy<3, Queer, Set Col, Cap in high school. In college, I've done Afropess, SetCol, and Fem stuff. I evaluate method v. method.

*I study Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. I have knowledge about gender/ feminism/ race critical theory and loveeeeee these arguments!

Plans:

Yes! I love a soft left AFF. My ideal round is a soft left aff and 3-6 off.

T:

I love T. Go for it. I think it's underutilized. I like procedural fairness impacts (when it's clearly an impact). If you want to win my ballot, paint a picture of what your vision of the topic is and what happens in debates on it, which matters much more to me than conceded generic blips and buzzwords.

Framework:

I lean more neg (60/40). IMPACTS.

DAs:

Yes, but they can get boring and overdone. I would rather read 5, solid, well-highlighted UQ cards than 10 poopy cards that say "it'll pass but it's cloooooseeee!" without ever highlighting anything beyond that sentence. Uniqueness controls the direction of uniqueness and the link controls the direction of the link.

CPs:

I tend to think condo bad (55/45). Some teams try to get away with murder. Yes, I will vote on 'condo bad'. I lean neg when the CP is based in the literature and there's a reasonable solvency advocate. I lean aff when the CP meets neither of those conditions.

Ks:

Focus on arg development & application rather than reading backfiles.

If your strategy involves going for some version of "all debate is bad, this activity is meaningless and only produces bad people" please consider who your audience is. Of course, you can make arguments about flaws in specific debate policies & practices, but you should also recognize that the "debate is irredeemable" position is a tough sell to someone who has dedicated 7+ years of her life to it and tries to make it better.

Examples are incredibly helpful in these debates, especially when making structural claims about the world.

LD:

I am policy debater at heart. I will flow every word you say. Speed is a weapon in debate.

I don't love theory/meta-theory/tricks. I find a lot of Philo debates have tricks. Please just win your arguments and do not trick your opponents. It is extremely rare I vote on it.

I am good for more policy-oriented theory arguments like condo good/bad, PICs good/bad, process CPs good/bad, etc.

See above for more specifics.

PF:

Send your docs and create an email chain from the get-go! Every other debate style has managed to learn this. Stop asking for evd without taking prep, just send everything and be fair.

I'm not flowing off the doc and probably won't look at it unless I have to.

Act as if I don't know the topic

I'm good for speed/ more policy like args BUT I do think that PF is changing in a negative way, if you want to do policy why are you in PF...

Congress:

Speak well. You are role-playing a policymaker... act like it.

Be prepared to speak on both sides of the bill.

I value evidence and credible sources.

DO NOT re-hash args.

Extemp:

I love good intros and transitions! I love to laugh a lil in an extemp round!

Organization is key!

I value evidence and credible sources.

I stay very up to date on current events... I will know what you're talking about... take that as you wish:)

Best of luck to you! If you have questions feel free to ask me before a round or email me!

General

I ask you to present relative information from valid sources. Take up an acceptable amount of your time, don't waste your time. Look presentable as well as act presentable ( don't be on your phone, don't talk out of order, don't be late, etc).

Congress

I ask you to be civil toward each other and to ask unique questions that are clear and understandable. Please use more credible sources such as .edu or .org rather than .com if you have the option. Try and keep your arguments different from others to keep the debate interesting and to keep questions moving. The PO should address most issues, do not be dependent on the Parli.

TL;DR

Speed is good just be clear and emphasize key arguments

Add me on the email chain adrianesau523@gmail.com

Be respectful

Quality of arguments over quantity of arguments

Cross important for speaks; make sure to utilize it well

Slightly truth over tech

O/V

I have did debate for four years at Cabot, and have experience in every type of event besides congress. My preferable event, however, is LD There are sections in this paradigm that go over my opinions about PF along with sections about certain types of LD debate strategies that are used often. Also, there's a really brief congress paradigm at the bottom.

Public Forum

It doesn’t really matter to me what you run. Follow basic public forum rules. If you spread or talk exceedingly fast I’ll most likely vote you down since that’s considered abusive unless the opponent just goes with it. At that point it’s fair game. In the rebuttals, make sure to be organized , and I prefer line-by-line with numbered responses if you have more than 1 response. Final focus should be strictly weighing and voters. No new args should be brought up in the summary and should be used for extending your own case.

LD

I don't really care what style you debate in as I have done both traditional and progressive LD. A major thing for me is that if you are to run a progressive case, you need to clarify your major impacts and make sure I catch on within the jumble of arguments you're spreading. Other than that, follow basic guidelines for spreading such as slowing down on taglines and etc. The following things are my viewpoints on the progressive arguments that could be used and just my basic viewpoints on clash and case arguments.

Topicality

If you can convince me that the opponent isn’t topical then that gives you some leverage. However, I don’t think that running just topicality and not touching any of the opponent's case is acceptable. If their arguments aren’t topical, explain why. Don’t just claim that they aren’t topical and not give any reasoning for why that is because at that point I’m not considering that as a legitimate argument. Topicality provides a way for good clash in a debate, but it shouldn’t be the only thing argued throughout. There should be other arguments ran so it’s not the only clash within the debate.

Disadvantages/Counterplans

I really enjoy this strategy, and I think it provides a fun, creative spin to a debate. Disads should be relevant and not built with out-of-date empirical evidence. Their needs to be a clear link of why taking the action of the resolution is bad, and have a clear impact of why the argument is even prevalent or important. Counter-plans are fun to run, but should be realistic. It should be able to sell it’s point of why the plan should be preferred, and should have evidence backing the plan. I would like to see how the plan would be enforced also that way I don’t have to interpret it for myself.

Case

I think a good case debate is important. I like case turns and outweighing impacts better than last minute arguments against the opponent's case being brought up because you were too busy trying to sell your own points. Defense is good, but their needs to be some sort of offense. Otherwise I have sat through a debate listening to two different sides of the topic without any clear turns or rebuttals, and I don’t think that makes for a good debate whatsoever. What ends up happening is entire contentions being dropped, and nothing for me to vote on other then who was a better speaker. I think debates should be more than that so make sure there is a genuine clash between the two cases, and not just you reading off your case and a bunch of backfiles of evidence just building already made arguments.

Kritiks

You should have a well developed Kritik shell when running this strategy. You should provide a general analysis of how it is related to the round, and have a clear link to how the argument is topical with the resolution. You should give a clear reason why I should vote for your K and how it should be weighed in the round. An alternative provided after the K would be preferable, especially if the implications of the K are applicable to the pre-plan world. If you are to go against a debater running a K, it’s important that you attack the framework of the debate as the kritik your opponent runs sets up the standard of the debate. I think it’s important that the opposing debater tries to control framework as it is a major part of any LD debate.

Theory

I don’t have much experience when it comes to this particular debate strategy. I’ll vote for whatever as long as the theory is constructed well and clear as to what it is advocating. The theory should have the four parts of a basic theory shell (interpretation, violation, standard, and voters). The standard the theory sets up should be realistic, and be able to clearly show why the interpretation is good for the debate. The warrant should clearly give a reason for why I should consider your theory. The usual voter is fairness and education, but feel free to read any voter you think of as long as you can warrant why it is important for the debate.

Congress

I don't care what perspective you take when speaking on a bill. The more unique the takes, the better. I just ask that you don't be homophobic, transphobic, sexist, or racist. It should go without saying but be respectful and have fun!

Cabot High School

I am a junior who has done policy, PF, and congress

LD/PF:

please don't spread, this is not policy

Make sure to signpost so I know how to flow

Make sure to contend with all your opponents' arguments or else they are dropped

Congress:

Make sure not to abuse the 10 second grace period

When citing sources, don't just give a name and date (ex: Smith in 2020) say where they are from, and establish credibility

Make sure to show decorum and be kind to your fellow delegates

Use Parliamentary Procedure

Hi my name is Phoenix Fogle, I have been the cabot debate team for 2 years now and have done PF, BQ, and congressional debate.

TLDR-

Speak slow

Say things clearly

Put me in the email cain (foglep1@cps.k12.ar.us)

Truth over Tech

PF-

I like to hear really good questions asked in cross x

Don’t spend all your time taking down your opponents arguments / spend time building up what they took down.

Find good things that will take down your opponents biggest arguments

I like to hear why you have the bigger impact and if they drop it really touch on that

Don’t freak out when you can’t answer a question just take a breath and think it through.

You got this

BQ-

Make your points clear and neat

Don’t be all over the place when talking about what your opponents said

Be clear when you talk

I like to hear good reason why you have the bigger impact and why you are right

In cross x ask good questions and I like to hear you guys clash a little

Congressional debate-

Make you points clear

When asking questions don’t say statements and wait for them to respond, ask a question

P.O be clear with the taps don’t be too quit so I can hear

When giving your speech don’t read too fast I just want to make sure I can understand

Don’t keep calling on the same person over and over again, make sure to call on others.

Arguments

I am open to all arguments as long as there is a good link chain that is well defended. If you present an off the wall argument and defend it well, I will probably consider it heavily. Treat me as a lay judge. There must be well flushed out impacts for me to consider. These impacts must be brought up in the constructives or they will not be weighed. Do not use any abusive arguments.

Evidence

Use good evidence. Don't quote blogs or shady journalists. I will ask for cards if I believe you are reading me crap. I judge quality over quantity. Explain why I should prefer your evidence over your opponents.

Other

SIGNPOST

IF you are going to read fast, read your tags slow and clear, then you can go as fast as you want. Be sure to be clear. If I can't understand you, I will put my pen down, thus signalling you've lost me. However, as long as you read tags clearly, I won't doc speaks.

Public Forum

Weighing is the most important part of PF. Use your impact calculus to explain why your argument should be voted on.

Lincoln Douglas

Be sure to compare values and value criterion and explain why I should favor yours over your opponents. Also, explain why your case ties into your values.

Congress

Speak clearly. Act like you actually care and that you aren't just trying to get another speech in. At least try to act like you know what you're talking about. Don't just spew words trying to gain an emotional response.

General things:

I vote Truth over Tech

Always be nice and respectful to your opponents. Never use any insults or derogatory language towards your opponent. Don't stress too much about debate and be sure to have fun.

I'm mostly LD-centered, so if I'm not judging you for that, I'm probably not going to be the best judge.

Be sure not to be racist or discriminatory at all.

Lincoln Douglas Traditional:

I'd personally say I prefer traditional rounds over progressive, since I feel like those have more clash. In a regular traditional round, I don't value framework too much, but in return clash is incredibly important. I'll still end up voting on FW some times but losing the framework debate isn't a loss for the overall debate, it's just an additional reason for me to vote on way. Clash is the most important thing to me in a debate, because debate's meant to be an argument and not a meeting where people disagree on one tiny part of grammar - they're really unenjoyable to watch and debate and will make me voting for you harder. Burden's are always accepted, feel free to run any wild observations as long as they're not abusive. Overall, just make sure to have good case and framework debate, and to have good clash with your opponent.

Lincoln Douglas Progressive:

I'm not the greatest supporter of progressive arguments, but I'm totally fine if you run them as long as you make sure that your progressive argument has a clear link and isn't something kind of out of nowhere. I should always know how this relates to the topic, and it should relate in a clear way. If I can't understand it or it's too vague, I'm not flowing it

On the topic of counterplans, I think they're fun and good if done well. The counterplan should be a fairly different approach to solving the problem the affirmative is trying to solve. Your counterplan should clearly have benefits and less risks than are present in the affirmative's. If you end up agreeing with the affirmative with your CP I may flow that against you since those arguments restrict clash and education within debate. I wouldn't be too worried about this if you're running a CP, and if I end up flowing your CP against you it likely won't be the round decider, just be sure your counterplans are good and well made, and that they don't restrict argumentation.

Overall with progressive, just try try to make your links clear and have clash with your counterplans. Even though I'm more traditional, don't be afraid to try new progressive args.

Hello! I'm a former Forensics student currently doing debate. I'm well versed in the LD format [and really love progressive debate] and have qualified at the district level on numerous occasions. I am the state runner-up for Big Questions style Debate in the Arkansas circuit. I am a varsity member of Cabot Debate, and as such, I hold all people I judge to a high standard.

Under no circumstances will I accept; false evidence, discriminatory evidence, and unnecessary profanity (if you're quoting something, you're fine).

On my judging habits, I'm a Tech over Truth most of the time. In other words, I'm willing to vote for the opposing side if you drop points. All you have to do is impact weight. That being said, if I believe something does outweigh and it was never directly mentioned in the round by either side, I'm still willing to vote on it. VERY IMPORTANT - I will always vote truth over tech for junior varsity unless I have a very good reason not to (i.e. being really really bad).

In terms of argumentation, there is a couple of things to avoid. The biggest one for me is overused impacts. I'm not a big fan of a super long linkage to nuclear war or climate change = extinction. However, something I absolutely love is super unique or nitpicky arguments. If you want to run it, go ahead. I prefer Traditional style debate, but I'm willing to listen to Progressive style IF YOUR OPPONENT IS! If the opponent says no, I will judge the round like a traditional judge. I can flow spread, but warn me if you're going to. Also, always do disclosure theory. I hate when people don't disclose.

Good luck, and if you have any questions after the round is over, feel free to ask me, or email me at hicksremin24@cps.k12.ar.us. For my LD peeps out there, start an email chain before the round, and you'll start off on 28 speaks.

Hello, I’m Carter Kirby, I’ve been doing debate for 2 years now. I’m most familiar with Congress but not totally unfamiliar with other styles. My pronouns are he/him or they/them and I don’t tolerate bigotry of any kind in a round. Be civil and be smart. I tend to be pretty chill :). My email is carterakirby@gmail.com if you have any questions, concerns, or you just think I seem cool lol

Speaking - I prefer clear speaking and persuasion over spreading. It’s hard for me to keep up and I need you to be articulate. Try not to be aggressive but don’t let that stop you from clashing with your opponent-- this is a debate.

Tech over truth

Theory is fine

Arguments - I really don’t have a preference when it comes to the types of arguments you run so long as you know what you’re talking about, present it well, and uphold it well. I prefer a lot of clash in debate and want to see you defend your arguments while criticizing the others. Adapt well to the person you’re debating.

Evidence - As log as it is up to date and not pulled from somewhere that is clearly shady/made up I could honestly care less where you get your evidence

Email: mordenannabelle@gmail.com

Personal attacks on your opponent will result in an immediate loss. Any discriminatory language, racism, sexism, ableism or other forms of hate will not be tolerated.

Do not misgender your opponent…it is just like, rude?

LD-

Theory is meh but I'm willing to hear it out

Almost always tech>truth

K affs can be good

Disclosure good

LD-

CX: Just don’t be a jerk, it’s unprofessional and unflattering. I respect debaters who utilize CX rather than just asking shallow questions. Sarcasm is good (just don't over do it)

Speaking-

I'm cool with spreading, just don't spread unless you are experienced in that field. I will drop points for incoherent, jumbled speaking.
-Speak with intent, if you don’t understand or mean the words being read, then you have the disadvantage in the debate. Keep me intrigued, you have a better chance of winning if you are passionate about your case.

Styles-

I respect that there are many styles of debate, however I prefer progressive. I am persuaded by logical and warranted arguments, I love Ks, especially Ts if done right. If you’re going traditional, it is imperative that you provide voting issues or at least a clear reasoning behind why I should vote for you, I think it just spices up the round. Going progressive, make sure your k’s have links. Lack of link takes away from your case drastically.

No topicality arguments unless you truly and utterly believe it is essential to the debate. Otherwise, I believe topicality is abusive of your rights as neg/aff

Fw- I’ll hear anything out; even TVAs as long as it has a solid relation to the topic. Fw is about LBL and explaining why your topic mode is good. The fw debate is very important to me, drop it and I will struggle to vote on your side.

Link turns are good, impact turns to education are great when explained right

If you aren’t going to at least try and maintain clash in 1nr/2ar, don’t bother speaking at all. Clash is essential to the structure of LD, please do not disregard this

IPDA-

Speaker points-

I understand it's not easy to formulate an entire case in 30 minutes, however please try and keep things organized. A messy case will result in lower speaks. Make sure you aren't just speaking to speak, if you aren't sure what to talk about, reiterate previously made points and tell me why they matter. Speak with intent, convince me that I should vote for you; don't simply read off of a script, I could do that myself, it's your job to give meaning to those words.

Clash. If you do not respond to your opponents arguments with either logical or warranted claims, then don't expect me to flow what you said. Clash is very important, if you can provide adequate defense/offense then I'll be sure to weigh that when making my decision

Affirmative- please do not abuse your right to define, debate requires a certain extent of fairness.

Contact me if you have any further concerns, I will gladly answer any questions you may have

Hi! Looking forward to meeting you all in my rounds! I have been debating for almost 2 years, and in this time I have debated a few formats, being BQ, LD, and PF. Pronouns are He/Him. If you have any further questions, please ask them BEFORE the round begins. I do have a few notes about my judging preferences:

IPDA: Although it is nice to have preparation for your rounds, I don't want it to just be about sources. I want to hear how your sources tie back to your topic, as well as your own arguments. Use your sources as EVIDENCE for your argument rather than the BASIS for your argument. IPDA is a format about improvisational skills. I don't want it to seem as if you are reading off of a script for the entirety of your speech. Although not essential, I strongly encourage you use unique arguments, as that is more fun for me as a judge and leads to more interesting clash. PLEASE signpost your arguments. It makes them easier for me, as your judge, to flow. Off-time road maps are encouraged AS LONG AS YOU STICK TO THEM.

Public Forum: Public Forum is my favorite type of Debate, both to watch and participate in. I love the clash in rounds, which is amplified by the cross examination periods. Please be sure to use this period wisely to further your case. Off-time roadmaps are encouraged as long as you stick to them. Please signpost your arguments. Also, I can not stress this enough: DO. NOT. SPREAD.

LD: Don't SPREAD and support your values. That's it. SPREADing makes it SO MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO FLOW and is not fun to listen to.

BQ: BQ is a very fun format and I love the topic this year. I would love to see clash on issues or discrepancies, as well as unique and well thought out arguments. Remember that Big Questions is not a debate about sources, but a debate about the Philosophical aspects of the topic.

Miscellanious:

Be Nice <3

Funny or Creative contention names are always nice :>

If you have any questions for me let me know :D. You can email me in two locations (I would encourage both)

Jaydondakigh@gmail.com

Noblejaydo24@gmail.com

I am more likely to answer if you use my school Email, as I am more active on that one with talking to teachers and conducting debate business. Thank you for having me as your judge! See you soon!

Cabot High School Senior Captain

TL;DR

I’m good with all arguments

Tech over truth

Make sure to not drop points

Don't give fake evidence, instant loss if you cannot provide the cards if asked.

Attack the case not the person, I will deduct a large amount of speaker points if you're attacking the person.

Have fun with the debate

I have started debating at Cabot since 8th grade. I am okay with all arguments. Use whatever you want as long as it doesn't discriminate against anyone. Make sure that you properly explain all arguments and don't just throw out buzzwords and jargon.

BQ

I generally prefer the standard of morality in BQ but if you can give me a reason not to, then that's great. You don't need to have a lot of statistics for BQ. I personally prefer well spoken arguments and slower speaking in BQ, but I will evaluate anything. Make sure you explain how your arguments and cards connect. I'm fine with all arguments as long as they are relevant.

PF

Make sure to take advantage of any definitions you can. Impact is very important policy wise so make sure to flesh it out throughout the entire debate. Fake evidence equals instant loss. If I cannot trust one piece of evidence I can't trust any of your evidence. Just argue well, If I am not given a weighing mechanism I will default to cost benefit analysis. Just debate and do it well, like I already said up above, I will evaluate any argument as long as it is explained well.

LD

I prefer that you link in your arguments and give me a reason to vote for you. Make sure to expand on your points and impact if you have one. These are important parts of the debate and give me a clear reason to vote. Make sure you expand on your framework and show me why I should consider your value/criterion over your opponents if the framework makes a difference. If the framework doesn't matter, then don't extend it.

Although your argument may hold truth I prefer the technical parts of the debate (i.e. you drop what they say about your point, and it is false if they are right). One thing I don’t like is trying to discredit sources just because they are from the past or not within the past 4 years; yes, it is important to have up to date sources, but at the same time it is not necessary if it is an analytical argument. If you do make an argument on the credibility of sources don't just say it's not credible, you also need to explain why I can't vote on it because of the lack of credibility. I know the connection is obvious, but unless you make it that connection, it won't be on the flow. If an opponent asks for a card provide the card or you lose credibility.

Congress

Just don't discriminate against anyone. Answer questions effectively. I don't do congress very much so I'll be frank and just say you're unlucky to have me.

IPDA

Same stuff for LD basically. Just make sure you explain your points well, I think IPDA is a great opportunity to show off the fundamentals of debate.

Isabella Parker

parkeisabe24@cps.k12.ar.us

Cabot High School

Formally a LD debater but I have competed in other forms

TLDR: You can put me on the email chain for your speech, email is above. Please have a clear voice and a direct rebuttal, it will be easier on both of us to flow, I also like clashes that are backed up with evidence and facts. And please respect your opponent, any type of racist, sexist, or problematic comments can result in points dropped. I am okay with speed as long as you have a clear voice and not mumbling. I am keeping time, but I think you should too.

LD: I believe framework, definition, and impact debates are important to winning a debate, I advise you to have a direct rebuttal or argument that clashes with your opponent's argument as well; do not make me assume what your rebuttal to that argument is. I view dropped arguments as a judge and a debater, so try to answer as many points as you can even if you don't have evidence to back it up, although I prefer evidence. Make sure not stray off topic of your debate. I do listen to cross-examination, so be respectful.

PF and IPDA: I have done PF a couple times last year but the same rules with LD to me applies with PF when it comes to the rebuttal, dropped arguments, framework, definitions, and impacts, and cross-fire. I have not debated nor judged many IPDA rounds, but I do know rules and framework for how the debate should go.

Congress: I have not done Congress virtually, however I have done Congress before. I believe that quality is better than quantity, meaning clear speaking in Congress is more important than the number of speeches you give. I think questions asked are good in Congress, I am still learning Virtual questioning, yet questions to me are viewed. If you are the one answering questions, answer with confidence and the same thing applies with asking questions.

A little bit about me :)

- I am a public forum (PF) debater, I have done Lincoln Douglas on occasion but PF is my cup of tea.

- I have judged PF, LD, and IPDA in the past and I absolutely love judging

- I am a public forum captain so if you have any questions or need any help, feel free to email me ~ robbihaley24@cps.k12.ar.us

Now into what I do and don't like in a round. All of these go for IPDA, LD, PF, Congress...you name it

PROGRESSIVE CASES

I absolutely despise progressive cases. Don't try to run them unless you don't have another case prepared. I'm a pf debater, meaning that I like more traditional, slower, and "general audience" arguments

SPREADING

When virtual: If you are anything like me then you love to speak quickly. I feel like with the nature of debate we want to talk as fast as possible to allow us to have as much information as possible. With that being said, when debating virtually I do not like when you spread. When you speak quickly over the chromebook, your words get mushed together because the computer can't keep up. I am not afraid to stop you mid-speech and tell you to slow down. When you spread, that not only affects your opponents but it also makes it harder for me to hear what you're saying.

When in person: Feel free to speak as fast as you like but fair warning, I value content over presentation. I am not impressed if you can speak 400 words per minute. BUT if I can't get all your information written down because you are talking faster than Edward Cullen can run, then that might affect the outcome of the debate because like I said content>presentation

CROSS EXAMINATION

I do not flow CX, the only thing that I will write down is your behavior. Debate is not supposed to be a hostile activity, show your opponent respect and don't talk down to them or treat them like dirt. Standing your ground and a bit of sass is permitted and also encouraged. I love clash but if you start to be mean to each other, it can affect who the winner of the round is.

FLOWING/REBUTTALS

I expect everyone to flow the opponent's case because when you move into your rebuttal speech I strongly encourage doing line-by-line. I will always flow EVERYTHING when judging but I don't want to have to go on a wild goose chase to try and figure out what you are refuting. If something is not addressed in your rebuttal speech I WILL COUNT IT AS A DROPPED ARGUMENT, so do your absolute best to refute all aspects of the opponent's case. If your opponent doesn't respond to one of your arguments BRING IT UP IN THE NEXT SPEECH. If you don't bring it up then I don't know. I will write down what you say and to preserve the fairness of the round, if you don't say it..it didn't happen.

RDF

I don't care who spoke better or who had the better questions in cross, whoever has the most of their case still standing is the winner. If you bring up arguments in your final speech it might change my decision against you because your opponent cannot respond. If you bring up any contradictions or you use faulty evidence you will not be the winner. If your plan is to reform the resolution then the other team automatically wins because you have brought up arguments that the other team is not prepared for. When giving a verbal RDF, I will tell you how it is. If you cannot handle the harsh truth then let me know beforehand and I will only put it on the ballot.

BEHAVIOR

Any offensive, discriminatory, sexist, hateful, harmful words or profanity will lose you the round. If you chose to belittle or as I call it "mansplain" words, events, or actions to your opponent you will lose. I do not tolerate people putting down their opponents based on their sex, race, sexuality, religion, culture, or appearance. Debate is meant to be a safe space so if you disrupt the peace, you will lose the round, and Selah or your coach will be hearing about it directly from me. (Which you do not want because I am very blunt.)

Best of luck to you in your rounds and I can't wait to judge for you!

EJ Robertson (She / Her)

Cabot High School

I have been in the Cabot Debate program for 3 years now. I have competed in Congress, Extemp., BQ, World Schools, and PF.

TL;DR

Tech over Truth

Articulate well, moderate speed. I won't flow what I don't understand.

Make it interesting, I like a lot of clash

Line-by-line rebuttals

Make sure to be confident in your speaking and have fun!

Public Forum

A really good speaker is usually what sets one side apart from the other, so make sure to be confident and articulate well. Framework is usually neglected, but I feel that’s one of the most important aspects of weighing the round. I like unique arguments, but make sure that they have solid reasoning. Clear road maps are important, and a line-by-line on the rebuttals make it a lot easier for me to flow and evaluate the round. Make sure to be respectful, don’t say anything that’s racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. because that shouldn’t really be part of debate. Clash also makes the debate more interesting, and it makes it easier to see which arguments are conceded to or dropped. Don’t make any new arguments during final focus, as it makes it difficult for the opponent to respond. Weighing is important because it tells me how to evaluate which side won. I also enjoy impact debates, but don't focus on it too much / go off topic because of it. Give enough time to rebuild or crystalize all arguments, don't spend too much time on one and neglect the others.

Lincoln Douglas

Again, speaking is VERY important, so make sure to speak clearly and confidently. Framework / Value and Criterion are extremely important, as they show me how to evaluate which side I give the win to at the end of the day. I like unique arguments that really challenge the other side. I like impact debates, just don't focus on them too much. Do a line-by-line rebuttal, because it makes it easier to flow. Make sure to be respectful and don’t say anything that is racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.

Congress

Quality > quantity. Make sure to be confident, remember that you’re talking to your fellow delegates, not the judges. Road map should be clear so that I know where to flow on the ballots. Make sure your arguments have good impacts, and going a little over time is better than going under imo. Questioning period is important to reinforce or build up arguments, so make sure to answer questions with substantial arguments. PO should know how to do their jobs, keep time, and use precedence and recency to call delegates. Make sure to be respectful during the debates and have fun.

He/him

I'm a former debate student from last year, and I have experience in everything except LD. I focus on both your arguments as well as your speech/tone. My only real issues are if you're impolite to your opponent or if you personally attack them instead of their argument. My general specialty is informative. That's about it, have fun :)

Contact me:

schnee1@cps.k12.ar.us

LD:

For LD I enjoy seeing a framework debate and I enjoy yall trying to make me see the round through your “lenses”. Your framework should make sense for the case that you are making to me and you should bring up your framework throughout the entire debate if you are going for a framework debate. If you manage to convince me AND point out to me during a speech that your opponent dropped the framework then there is a good chance you will win the round (as long as it is a framework debate between the both of you and not just one of you). Although framework is a big part you should also try and still create clashes with the opponent's argument and if possible use it to your frameworks advantage.

Definition Debate For LD:

I can also get along with a definition debate as long as it makes sense and it is a topic that heavily relies on definitions (i.e. Is Civil Disobedience in a Democracy Morally justified?). In a definition debate I would still like to see clashes with the opponent's argument and I would still like to see defense for your case. Make sure you don’t get wound up in one thing because if you concede to points and your opponent mentions it I don’t care how good your definitions are I have to vote your opponent up.

Progressive debaters:

I am fine with a progressive debate as long as you make it make sense to me. I don’t want to be told a case that makes absolutely no sense and a case that your opponent can’t even defend against. If you give your speeches on a case that you randomly made I see it as unfair towards the other opponent and you will end up losing the round. Just don’t be too radical if you are going to be progressive and make sure the case is understandable.

P.s. to everybody

BE RESPECTFUL AT ALL TIMES

Congress:

Make sure you speak with confidence and you don’t fidget much. Make sure to list your sources in your speech and make sure that they are credible as well (you don’t want to list PETA as a source). This is a very heavy public speaking event and I understand nerves but don’t let them show. During the questioning period be respectful and don’t cut the other person off. Also during questioning don’t beat around the bush unless it is leading to something. Be polite while others are speaking and if you are going to talk make sure it is barely a whisper if I hear anyone besides the speaker I will ask that yall be quiet or stop talking in general. The PO should know what they’re doing and make sure to keep things fair. All in all be a good speaker and it doesn’t matter how many speeches you gave because quality over quantity.

If you do an email chain, include me simsmikay24@cps.k12.ar.us

No disrespect will be tolerated.

No discriminatory comments.

Best if you kept your own time.

Lincoln Douglas

tech vs. truth

link all arguments to value

IPDA

tech vs. truth

Speech:

use all of speech and prep time

if you speak fast send opponent and I your case

go down flow when refuting

don't make up new points in your last speech

CP:

run them

Flow:

road maps are appreciated

let me know your order so I know how to flow

Christina Smith

Arkansas State University

Mainly an IPDA Debater but has PF and Congress experience

General

When looking at debates, I love clash. I believe that one of the main focuses of debate is a good clash, that way you see an actual debate going on. This can go for both Congress and PF.

When debating, always make sure that your arguments are clear and go down line by line, that way I can flow easier which will help me judge your round better. If your impacts are major to your case, make them seem important. If the number of cards is major to your case, make them seem important. I’d hate to look past them.

When looking at speaks, if you can speak loud and proud and add emphasis to your speaking, then you're almost guaranteed good speaks. I am not a fan of robotic, blunt-speaking because I will zone out real fast.

I also have zero tolerance for disrespect. In some instances, you can be aggressive to your opponent, however, if you step over the line and insult or show disrespect to them in any way, it will reflect on your speaks. While I know debate can get loud, it also needs to be civil.

IPDA

On the collegiate level, I mostly focus on IPDA, so IPDA is an expertise of mine. My paradigm for IPDA really reflects what I look for in both Congress and PF. So just read below.

PF

If Congress was eradicated from existence, then my go-to would be PF. I enjoy PF a lot, mainly because it makes us discuss topics that you wouldn’t usually talk about. That being said, please be sure to provide definitions and frameworks within your case. Not only does it inform me and others about the topic, but your framework helps me decide on who I should vote for, depending on which side shows that they fit the framework better. That means that you should always emphasize your impacts within the debate. I can agree that framework is in no way the most important, and please do not have a framework debate, but it’d be nice to have it included. In summary, you should always weigh out your impacts and go over the arguments that were spoken throughout the debate. The final Focus should be mainly on voters, that way I can vote more effectively.

When it comes to cx, as I have said before, the clash is key. That being said, I mainly prefer open cross, that way there’s more possibility of the clash. You don’t have to do an open clash, but it’s preferable.

Please do not spread either. Not only is that disrespectful to your opponents, but I can’t flow, meaning I can’t judge.

Congress

There are not many paradigms for Congress I have, as my paradigms most closely follow PF, but all I ask for congress is to have clear points within your speech and be sure to speak well. And please, for the love of anything religious, don't repeat arguments. I don't want to fall asleep during your session.

Bailey Van

Cabot - Class of 2024

Add me on the email chain: vanb1@cps.k12.ar.us

Interests & Preferences

Talking Speed: Speed is alright as long as I can clearly hear you and your arguments. Be mindful of internet glitches and cut-outs because if I can not understand you, then I will not flow your speech.

Argumentation: I am a technical debater, meaning that I prefer technical arguments over truth arguments. Be sure to sell me on your arguments and explain how your opponent conceded to your impacts because that will be a huge advantage on your side!

Big Questions

I consider myself a rebuttal type of judge since I am a huge fan of clashing and turning around argumentation, so be sure to include a lot of those in your debate! Other than that, make sure to speak in an articulate manner as well as listen to your opponents’ speeches and main points.

Congressional

Speaking is the most important factor in this style of debate because you need to present your arguments well enough in order to succeed. Make sure to slow down as well as enhance your emotions up a bit because debating with little confidence will not be convincing enough!

Lincoln Douglas

Framework framework framework. This is crucial for winning the debate round because it is the overall “structure” on what your whole argument should be based on. Try to tie it in with the impact calculus since that can play a heavy role on your side. Make sure to not go too overboard with it because it can get repetitive sometimes. Other than that, be sure to speak clearly and provide a good line-by-line argumentation to help organize the whole round.

Public Forum

Impacts are a big factor in winning this style of debate, so make sure to weigh heavily on that during the round. I would also love to see you provide some sort of framework so it can help me view the round better in YOUR lens. It is not a huge deal, but I would definitely prefer it!

World Schools

Framework is a big deciding factor when it comes down to the winner of this debate round because I need to know how to view the round. The content should also emphasize more on the impacts of your side instead of just having pure definitions, so be mindful of that.

Non-Interests & Dislikes

I do not tolerate being rude or disrespectful toward your opponents because at the end of the day, it all comes down to sportsmanship. This includes being racist, homophobic, ableist, etc. towards people.

Lydia Veazey

She/her

veazelydia24@cps.k12.ar.us

tech over truth

speaking- I prefer clear and persuasive speaking rather than spreading.

I do not tolerate bigotry.

How to win my ballot

explain your links and impacts of all arguments.

be well organize.

tell me how I should write my ballot, and why.

you can do evidence comparison as necessary.

IPDA-

Having clash with your opponent is always best during the round.

Make sure your arguments are clear and well understood.

When in the round use up all of your time.

Do not bring up new arguments during your last rebuttals.

During the question period give “to the point” answers. Don't ramble on. It is a waste of time.

A good tip is to really hit on your impacts all during the round.

flow all throughout the round.

Congress

Know your speech.

Answer question without rambling.

Quantity over Quantity

Speak clearly and use up all time.

Have confidence

Have fun with debate!

Mark Warford

IPDA Captian @ Cabot Debate

IPDA:

The way I judge rounds is fairly simple, I like to have good clashes in rebuttals and look for arguments that get past or debaters don't talk about. I will look for the side that takes down more of the other side's points and defends themself. I would love it if both sides gave a weighing mechanism and a roadmap. Something that I am always open to is discussion debate, it can help make the round more enjoyable from a judging standpoint and I encourage it. The last thing that I will judge on is how good your points are, since it is IPDA I won't be judging so harshly on evidence but your points need to make sense.