Hello! I am an impromptu speaker myself, so here are the main things I focus on while judging:

- engagement (eye contact, gestures)

- points made

- tone, overall flow, enunciation

Lowell 23' Berkeley 27'

Email: lowelldebatedocs [at] gmail.com for email chains and tournaments.

TLDR: Speed is fine but clarity > speed. Prefer a policy debate instead of a K v K debate.

Background: Hi, I'm Michael. I was a 2A/1N at Lowell High School. Jenny Liu has carried me as my 2N/1A partner, with both of us under the watchful eye of the Mr. Debnil Sur. Don't call me judge to quote the person who dragged me into policy "I am at most three years older than you, and am a child myself."

Circuit

Topicality: Sure. I evaluate T through competing interpretations. Reasonability is not a real argument ... unless it's dropped ...

K Affs: Limited experience. Too often in these debates there is not clear warranting / impacting of things like fairness, clash etc. The team with the better high level storytelling and clearer explanation of arguments that matter will pick up my ballot.

Neg K: Framework Ks are awesome! Ks with an alt are cool too, but it seems that the alt never gets developed or explained sufficiently to overcome the status quo. Affirmatives that exploit this and negatives that explain why this doesn't matter (dropped, floating pics, having an actual alt that overcomes the links) will have a stronger chance of picking up my ballot.

CP: adv cp and offsets look pretty good for this topic; would love to see a case specific cp with a decent solvency advocate, +0.2 speaks if you have a case specific cp with a rehighlighted piece of their ev that says your plan solves (and the rehighlighting actually says what you want it to say).

DA: Sure, I'll vote on them if your ahead, generic links are bad but it doesn't matter if the 1AR drops them, explain why your impact outweighs. I do not think you need evidence to make an argument. Many bad DAs can be reduced to noise through smart analytics. Doing so will improve your speaker points. Better evidence will require your own.

Case: I think that evidence comparison on the case page just did not exist for the NATO topic. More likely to be convinced by smart analytics and evidence rehighlightings then impact defense alone. Warrant comparison is so important -- make the 2AR actually have to spend time on the case page pls!!

CX: I flow it so use it to poke holes and get concessions. Don't be rude, cutting people off is fine but do it in a polite way. Open CX is cool.

Condo: More sympathetic to the AFF then typical. Would much prefer to judge a well warranted and high clash 3-off debate than a 11-off 1NC where the 2AC gets like 4 arguments on every flow at best.

Friv T: I view it as a reason to reject the argument not the team.

+0.1 if you follow @lowellpolicyheg on insta, tell me before the round!!

+0.1 for your team if you title one of your docs "lay-debate-is-not-dead".

+0.2 if you make a funny joke about Debnil, Jessie, Taylor, Taytum, Eloise, Win, or Jenny (the seven of them have taught me everything I know about debate so you can look at their paradigms if you really want to understand where I am coming from as a judge).

Holiday Special -- +0.1 if you promise to give one of your teachers a thank you card, to do this before your constructive (1AC, 1NC, 2AC, 2NC) tell me which teacher you are giving it to, and give me a sentence or two on why they deserve a card :)

Policy (Lay / GGSA): Circuits fine if both teams agree to do so, throughout my career there have been too many circuit teams that agree to a lay debate and then run 10 off -- it's not cool.

Ethos matters! Looking at me instead of your computer can get you a long way especially when writing my ballot in the 2nr or 2ar.

Case in a lay debate setting: Honestly totally go for case with me, I have a pretty high threshold that the aff has to pass, if you can prove to me beyond the preponderance of the evidence that the aff can't solve or access their impacts I'll vote for you. Use their ev against them. If you are going for just case in the 2nr say at the top "Russell Brand would vote on stock issues so you should too" it will remind me that GGSA is a lay tournament so I can pull the trigger on solvency, plus it will boost your speaks 0.1

Parli stuff:

Ethos > logos; I'm sorry but if your doing parli I have 0 respect for your ev so I vote on your rhetoric and delivery of arguments.

That said make your arguments logical not going to vote on something insanely stupid just because you said it well.

Perms are a test of competition, running one in 2a does not lock you into it for the VI.

I'll strike new arguments but call a POO the first time they make one, I'll say taken into account and be strictly looking for new arguments through out the rest of the VI. That said if your wrong I'll be very sad so make sure your right that it's new.

+0.1 if you follow @lowellpolicyheg on insta, tell me before the round.

+0.1 if you make a joke about anyone who's done Lowell parli

I've had extensive experience competing in Speech and Congress. In speeches, I'm looking for great writing, innovative blocking/gestures, and an original topic area. I also have an acting background, so I will be looking for specificity, character distinction, and believable emotions. Make me feel invested in your character and in your world! I appreciate trigger warnings where needed and want to feel connected to you as a speaker.

As for Congress, I'm looking for original but well-researched and connected contentions, pointed and thoughtful questions, and overall professional engagement in the round. Be kind to your PO, fill your three-minute speech window, and make sure to touch on the other Senators' points.

So excited to see all the talent and courage! Good luck!

Speak at a pace that people can understand. In order to cover too many thing in your time limit don't speak so fast that i cannot understand anything .

Be authoritative in what you say. if you are not convinced what you are saying, i am not convinced either.

Enjoy speech and debate!!!!

Hello! I'm a high school competitor for 3 years, having made it to state twice. I'm most experienced in prepared speeches.

I usually look for:

- passion/realness (connection to speaker)

- how easy something is to understand/grasp

- performance (tone variation, movements, pauses, etc.)

hello!!! [she/her] :)

i've been doing speech (and only speech) for three years, so you can bet that i am pretty unfamiliar with debate. but just some general things to help me out since i'm pretty inexperienced:

-please do not talk super fast or spread, i will probably have a hard enough time keeping up at normal speed

-signpost!!! clarity is very nice and cool

-don't be mean or rude -- it does not look good

-more speaker points if you are funny or you crack a joke :D (trust me, my sense of humor is so bad i will laugh at basically anything)

-i will be Lost most of the time so please be patient and help me out if i do something wrong (which i am bound to do)

-please enjoy this image for reading my paradigm:

https://64.media.tumblr.com/9f8bd0d27a40197e6d02d253574ead2c/tumblr_nhoy3yA27u1sxjko8o1_500.jpg

-i hope that you have a cold pillow to sleep on tonight, thank you very much :]

History:

I am a current high school senior, and have been competing for four years. I have competed in LD, PF, Parli, Congress, and various IE events.

Congress:

I value structure, clash, and pace. Research should be sufficient, and the questions that come at you should be responded to with the best of your ability. Please be polite, even in clash. If you are a later speaker, I expect rebuttals against earlier speakers, and please try not to repeat existing arguments, unless you have something to add. Please be active in the rounds, as it shows you are prepared and paying attention.

LD:

Please don't spread, although you can speak relatively quickly. Your value and value criterion should be held up within the constructive and within your arguments. Show me why your value is better than your competitors, and if you can, please try to show why your case can uphold both values. Make sure to have strong cross questions, and respond to the best of your ability.

PF:

Evidence is key. If you can provide good evidence and keep it strong through the round, you will be in a good place in my book. Pace must be understandable, which means no spreading. Have good synergy with your partner, and try not to overlap in answering questions, and uphold your framework/standard through your case.

Parli:

Be able to defend your claims that you make. Although it is extemp, you should provide good evidence and be able to provide a strong case. Have respect for you opponents.

IE:

Your speech should be smooth, and your presentation should be enjoyable for you and me. Please be entertaining! I am excited to watch your speech!

Please do not spread and speak clearly. During cross fire, please ensure you are sticking to the topic and/or the argument brought up. Provide evidence. Be respectful to your opponents

School Affiliations: Dougherty Valley Bridge

Judging/Event Types: Congress

Even though this is my first year judging- third event, I have a fairly good understanding of Judging Congressional Debate. I have two kids. One now a College Freshman. Both my kids have been in Speech & Debate since the very start of middle school.

*For me speaking well is as important as what you are saying. That being said you don't have to change your pace for me. I can follow you.

*Things that will help me make a decision at the end of each round are Clear arguments, Impacts that will show the depth of knowledge of your argument and a good flow.

*I will be taking notes.

*Ask questions, have refutations and evidences that show you are engaged in the round.

*Last but not the least be respectful towards your fellow debaters.

Goodluck !

I am a parent judge who has been judging for around 1 year. Definitely a lay judge.

I will be judging based on the abilty to convince me. The round will automatically be won based on substance. (debate).

I'm tech>truth.

I like clash and people explaining why they deserve my ballot.

Impact calc is very important. The link has to be crystal clear, no shakey links.

Framework debates are good, because then I know what to vote for.

I'lll buy any arg that makes sense.

I want to see unique args that set you apart.

I'm not gonna understand theory or k's so dont run them.

*Speaks*

Impress me by looking confident and speaking clearly in a way that is understandable.

27.5 speaks is default

29 is a good round

30 is outstanding.

Despite that good luck, I look forward to judging you.

Here is some more info about how you win my ballot. here

I really value the amount of creativity, preparation and effort that goes into the activity of debate and speech competitions, and am always looking forward to seeing the new perspectives that students from diverse backgrounds have to contribute to the ongoing discussion.

Although most of my experience comes from judging Congress events, the elements I look for and highly value in speeches remain constant across the board.

- first and foremost, an environment of mutual respect in which competitors maintain a professional demeanor is of utmost importance

- ensure that you clearly articulate your arguments (any generic argumentation that does not contribute to the overall point or "beats around the bush" should be avoided)

- strong public speaking skills, including, but not limited to varying tones, hand gestures, confident delivery, and eye contact have huge value

- a normal rate of speaking is greatly preferred, as it allows me to concurrently take notes

- out-of-the-box, eccentric, and creative ideas catch my attention!

Introduction

Name: Rishit Pradhan

Email: pradhanrishit@gmail.com

School: Stockdale '23

Top Level Thoughts (Read this if u want to win)

I think in terms of adaptation the stylistic preference of the judge comes prior to the stylistic preference of the event. So I’ll buy most args that aren’t problematic.

I am a parent judge who has judged for about two years. I won't understand super fast talking of any kind, so I advise you to speak at a normal pace.

I will only vote based off what is said in the round, and will not make any assumptions myself. This means that you should assume that I know nothing about the topic, which is probably true. If you want me to consider an argument, I suggest you bring it up in the final speeches of the debate. This is mainly where I will make my decision, so I think clearly stating your reasons on why you won here is important.

Other than that, have fun.

I am a high school debater, and I've competed in a variety of events. For debate events, make sure you are speaking at a speed that your opponents can understand. Please be respectful to your opponent(s) or other competitors. Aside from that, be creative and have fun!

High School Speech Competitior in Original Oratory

Judging Criteria:

-Clear pronunciation and voice intonation

-Easy to follow ideas

-Connection with audience through eye contact, hand gestures, fluid movements

-Poised speaking, confidence is key, show vulnerability

I'm new to judging, so prefer to judge speech to gain some experiences on overall flow/process, but open to other events too.

I like logical presentation of arguments. To me, good arguments are crucial, how you structure the outline, connect the dots and present it are equally important.

I value real world impacts, so don't hesitate to demonstrate that if you can.

I also like the sense of humor, which I consider a great presentation style if used properly.

For debate, being able to sell your own idea is good, but being able to attack the opposing idea convincingly is also necessary, I'll take both into consideration.

I award speaker points based on the debate skills rather than the arguments.

In cross, proper behaviors are expected from both sides - let your opponent finish their thoughts before interrupting. Being rude, offensive, racist, sexist etc. will be scored low.

Long time coach with tons of judging experience across most events. California doesn't have OI, Prose, or Poetry so those would be exceptions.

Policy, PF, LD, and Parli you can run any argument you wish. However, you'll need to go slow and explain the position. "Politics Disad" means nothing to me....explain the argument. The default is probably for a debater to think I'm a slow judge or a traditionalist, and on some level that is true, but I'm willing to listen to most any argument if it's explained and warranted.

Email: jenndwu@gmail.com

I am a parent judge. My child debates in Policy.