I've debated 4 years at Durham Academy.

I'm mostly looking for warranting and weighing, so explain every logical step of your argument to me and explain why it matters more than their argument. Remember to be respectful!

I am new to this judging but really excited and energized to sit through sessions and be part of it. My background being computer professional for past couple of decades but having through understanding of current affairs.

My expectation from participants is to articulate their arguments with clear and precise points to support their stance.

I competed from 7th grade thur college - I was a Policy Debater.

I have been coaching for 20 + years. I am not a fan of the direction that most debate is going.

Don't waste my time with obscure arguments. Bonaparte once said that "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever."

You need to extend BOTH the warrant AND impact of your argument(s) in later speeches if you're serious about finessing my ballot. PS...make sure you have a warrant and impact...

If your flow and delivery are clear - SPEED isn't a problem, but if it sounds like you are having a spiritual moment while you are running your case - I am not impressed. Spitting is just rude. Work harder - no-one cares.

Loud isn't an emotion. No Bullies aloud/allowed 20L is in your future.

I am okay with offtime roadmaps - if it's really a roadmap and not trying to sink the other team...

Signposting is fine - I am an English teacher.

Use author qualifications when first citing a piece of evidence (for extensions last name will suffice).

I like good solid evidence, clear debate, and solid connections.

Debate is hard but it's not personal. Have fun - be kind - play fair and tell great stories.

I love powerful words and phrases.

CX can be the root of the best conversations.

Hello, I am Andrew. I did congress for a bit, but the vast majority of my experience is in PF, so this paradigm is mostly only applicable to PF.

In general, I'm pretty flexible when it comes to style. I don't mind too much speed and won't immediately dock speaks for it, as long as it is comprehensible. I do flow, so make sure to warrant and extend any offense that you want me to vote off of. Equally, extend any defense to arguments that make it through the round (including weighing. Weighing is important, but make sure to contextualize your weighing and do some comparative analysis between your world and that of the opponents. If neither team really provides this comparison and both have valid offense at the end of a round, I'll generally default to a utilitarian framework.

The comparison rule also applies for evidence battles. If an argument comes down to my evidence vs my opponents, I'll side with the team that explicitly explains to me why their evidence is to be preferred (whether it be corroboration, postdating, or some flaw in their methodology).

Time your own prep and don't stall between speeches unless you're using prep. I don't usually flow crossfire, so if something important happens make sure to reiterate in a speech, but it is a good place to indicate how familiar you are with the topic and your own case.

Other than that, I don't generally like theory, particularly in PF, particularly against inexperienced opponents.

Of course be nice, have fun, don't take it all too seriously. Good luck!

Hi, I'm Aryan Nair. I competed in PF at Cary Academy for 4 years and I'm now a sophomore at Duke. I would classify myself as a traditional PF judge.

I don't flow crossfire so anything you want me to flow should come up during speeches.

Here are a few things I like:

1. Warranting and Responsiveness: If you just read cards don't expect to win my ballot. Give me some sort of analysis and warranting behind your arguments. I like clash in round. Make sure that the responses you make are specifically responsive to case. Once again, don't just read cards, give me how those cards specifically take out their argument.

2. Signposting: Please signpost it helps me flow and gives structure to your speeches.

3. Comparative Analysis: I see that in a lot of rounds two people will have cards saying the opposite things. At that point you need to prove to me why your card is better (warranting, postdating, etc) otherwise you leave it to a 50/50 where I have to decide which card is better.

4. Extensions: Your final focus should bring up the same topics and cards as your summary. New arguments in final focus will not be flowed. If you drop an argument in summary, you concede that argument no matter how bad their argument is.

5. Weighing: Make sure to weigh impacts and links at least in final focus. It is the main way you are going to win my ballot.

6. Be Respectful: There is a difference between being assertive and rude. If you are being disrespectful in any way I will drop you and give you low speaker points. Make sure to have respect for your opponents.

If you have any questions feel free to email me at aryan.nair@duke.edu.

Props to the novice teams that actually read judge paradigms. The main thing I really care about at the end of the day is weighing. If there is no weighing in the round, I may vote on something stupid like whoever's tie looks better or how funny your case is.

Debated three years at Durham Academy.

Junior debater at Thales Academy Rolesville. Experience in PF and LD. Insert standard no disrespect message here.

Preferences

Please avoid technical debate (T’s, K’s, CP’s) in PF unless necessary in round due to extenuating circumstances.

I’m okay with speed but keep in mind that it’s PUBLIC Forum, so keep it reasonable.

I do not flow cross, so if anything important was said, bring it back up in your speech.

Calling cards is fine. Let me know if you want me to check evidence, if not, I won’t see it.

If you don’t extend (meaning you mention something in 1C and don’t bring it up until FF), it doesn’t weigh.

Hey everyone, I'm Miles and I'll be your judge. For a bit of background, I'm a senior at Cary Academy and I've been a second speaker in PF debate for the past 3 years. I'm sure you already know this but just so we are absolutely clear no ad-hominem attacks whatsoever or I will drop you and give you bad speaks.

In general I would say I am a flow judge, and the main factor that will decide my vote is what's on the flow; however, if it is close/unclear speaking will definitely sway my final vote.

General Rules/Suggestions:

-Please extend your arguments throughout your speeches. If you drop your arguments I will not weigh them.

-Maintain consistency through Summary and Final Focus especially with weighing mechanisms

-Weigh, Weigh, Weigh!!!

-Please do not run theory or Ks

-Don't just tell me "since they didn't respond to xyz card" restate what the card is arguing and tell me why its important in the context of the round

-I am ok with some speed but DO NOT spread. If you spread I will end up writing down nothing you say and you'll just end up hurting yourself

- Jokes are always fun and may end up benefiting your speaks if well used :)

Hello, I am currently a Senior at Cary High School and will be a Freshman at Georgia Tech in the fall. I am one of the two PF captains at Cary High and have been debating PF all 4 years of HS.

To start any offensive language e.g sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, etc. will result in an immediate loss. Being overbearing in crossfire will result in a deduction of speaks and if it becomes problematic will result in a loss. You can interject while being respectful. Talking down to your opponents or blatant disrespect will result in a loss of speaks.

My philosophy for Public Forum is tech over truth meaning that I will ignore any outside facts or previous knowledge and instead weigh arguments based on evidence only brought up in the round to an extent. If you argue xyz historical event did not happen or the sky isn't blue then I will not weigh that evidence. I'm fine with niche args or "joke" args if they are properly argued and well supported e.g. Space force will help us establish galactic supremacy or smth like that.

I am a flow judge and will cast my ballot based on flow and not how well a team speaks; however if it is a very close round then speaking well will provide a reason to sway towards one side or another.

General Rules for argumentation for me are

-Please extend your arguments throughout your speeches. If you drop your args I will not weigh them.

-Maintain consistency through Summary and Final Focus especially with weighing mechanisms

-Provide me with weighing mechanisms and why

-Please do not run theory or Ks

-Don't just tell me "since they didn't respond to xyz card" restate what the card is arguing

-Signpost! Signpost! Signpost! If I can't tell what part of the debate you are refuting or supporting in your rebuttal, summary or FF it will hurt your chances at a W.

-Respond to 1st speaker rebuttal in your rebuttal if you are speaking 2nd

-I am ok with some speed but not spreading. If you spread I will not weigh any arguments or evidence brought up while spreading.

Respect is a really big thing for me. If you portray confidence while maintaining respect your speaks will reflect that.

Adding Daft Punk or Playboi Carti lyrics to your speech in any reasonable way, shape or form will give you a +1 point and a potential +1.5 if you can impress me

I have done LD for the last 3 years at Apex Friendship High. I'm okay with pretty much everything; K's, theories, counter-plans are all fine. Speed-wise, be clear but understand that I cannot flow what I cannot hear, your opponent probably won't be able to either.

Don't bring up anything new in the 2AR, but you can respond in the 2NR to arguments made in the 1AR.

Voters: Give me reasons to vote for you. Tell me how I should weight the round.

Good luck!

I am currently a high school student. I have competed in PF for three years both nationally and locally.

I vote off the flow, which mainly encompasses speeches. I do try to pay attention to cross for anything interesting that comes up, but if you deem a question in cross as extremely important, I would suggest referencing it in your case. I am not a progressive judge, in fact, I'd more consider myself lay. I can still deal with progressive debate, but I much prefer the narrative focus - I believe it engenders more communication and persuasion. You'll grab my vote with well-warranted claims, convincing arguments, and good impacts. Analysis, linkage, and warranting are just as important as evidence. I appreciate narrative focus for arguments and quality over quantity when it comes to cards and blocks.

When you are responding to an argument (especially if you wish to turn it), just reading the block is not enough. You've got to tell me why your evidence is better than theirs and how it turns/blocks their case.

Summary and FF are the most important speeches; however, I do not particularly care how you organize them as long as they are coordinated and serve their purpose. Make sure you tell me why you win (voters/weighing); I am more likely to vote for you if you extend and warrant your impacts and weigh them over your opponents'.

Other minor things:

Speed - not an issue insofar as I can understand it.

Time - if you could time yourselves, that would be great. If not, I can time for you.

Speaks - I will give you speaks no lower than 27 unless you act rude, disrespectful, discriminatory, etc. Being polite is more likely to raise your speaks.

Calling cards - please only call cards that you need or that look suspicious. It takes a lot of time and interrupts the flow of the round. I won't stop you from calling them, but please be mindful.

LD - I have some experience judging LD, and my general principles regarding it are the same as for PF. However, if you're going to do something very complex, treat me like a parent judge.

Hello everyone! Just to be clear, I'm currently a senior who absolutely sucks from Cary High. I've been doing PF for the last 3 years, and have gone to a variety of local and national tournaments in that time. That means that I'm completely fine with speed, and I'll be flowing everything except for cross. If something important happens in cross, make sure to mention it in an actual speech.

PLEASE SIGNPOST - An off-road is fine, but keep it short. I will cut you off if you use it to bring up warrants, evidence, or impacts. Make sure your speeches are organized as it makes it easier on the flow and I'm less likely to get lost.

PLEASE WEIGH - Please don't just yell magnitude or timeframe or scope at me, make sure to bring up warrants the prove why your impacts mean more.

TECH OVER TRUTH - I have done a lot of prep on this topic, but the second I step in the room, I will forget everything I know. I don't care how wild your arguments are as long as you manage to support them properly.

EVIDENCE - I'll only call for evidence if it becomes a sticking point in the round. Otherwise I'll believe pretty much everything you say.

Please nothing racist, sexist, or homophobic, or you will lose and get speaks you won't enjoy.