UC Berkeley ‘27

Compete PF/EX

_______
sanjay.amirthraj@gmail.com- feel free to start email chains before the round

Hey! My name is Sneha Bhale (she/her) and I did 4 years of Speech and Debate at Westwood High School. I competed in extemp as my main event both locally and nationally and I did some congress. I currently attend UT Austin.

debate events- please add me to the email chain- snehabhale21@gmail.com

Extemp- I prioritize content over fluency. I give the 1 to whoever answers the question adequately and addresses every actor mentioned. The substructure needs to be easy to follow and your impacts need to be realistic and topical. For fluency, fluency errors should not impede my ability to understand you and humor can go a long way. As for sources, please do not make them up and try to diversify your sources (use think tanks and academic journals). As for time, I don't care a whole lot but make sure it's evenly spaced out for every point. Overall, your content should make sense and should have sources, and having humor incorporated and a conversational tone will go a long way with ranks.

PF- Treat me as a flay (maybe a little more flow) judge. I will flow the round and have some exposure to PF. I'm not too fond of spreading but if you speak fast, I would like a speech doc. My flow shouldn't be all over the place and easy to follow. I think weighing is extremely important as well as the continuation of arguments in the summary and final focus. I also would prefer to be added to the email chain and will call for evidence so make sure there is no paraphrasing or twisting of information. During cross-ex, please be patient and polite. Speaks will be assigned based on clarity and overall demeanor within a round. I'm not too familiar with progressive arguments but I will evaluate them. Overall, I like a clean flow, slow speaking, weighing, roadmaps, warrants, and proper evidence protocols.

Cong- The PO should know proper procedures and keep track of precedence and recency well. The PO should also ensure voting happens fairly and keep track of everything efficiently. I will keep my precedence and recency sharts and will double-check. As for the competitors, congress is a matter of participation so make sure you pay attention. Try to pay attention the whole round and ask questions. I'm not too fond of pre-prepared speeches. Speeches that follow the debate and clash go a long way. Rehash is also a no go and I will dock points for it- please bring in new evidence and new points. If you are speaking later in the round, please bring in new evidence and use Clash rather than rephrasing previous speeches. The questioning period should be respectful to all competitors. As a personal preference, I prefer precedence and recency to be tracked online. It gets very messy when it is on paper. Overall, I like clashes in speeches, effective questioning, proper use of sources, and clear speaking.

And most importantly, have fun with it! Please let me know if I can do anything to make the round a safe place or a better experience for you. Also, feel free to ask questions/clarification on my paradigm or for any feedback after the round.

Hey! My name is Sraavya Danala, I am a freshman at Texas A&M, and a former highschool extemper.

PF:

Add me to the email chain: sraavya.danala@gmail.com

Do not spread, but if you do, then make sure you still have clarity when you speak. Be nice. If you drop an argument in a speech and your opponent does not address it then I will not evaluate it. At the end of the round, based on the arguments given and addressed the team that made the most persuasive case will win.

EXTEMP:

I am both a content and fluency judge. I will concentrate on content but will still notice your fluency, so don't prioritize one over the other.

- Answer the question entirely, not just a certain part of the question.

- Filler words are not preferred, but occasionally it is okay.

- Clarity of speaking is important: If you are speaking too fast or not enunciating enough for me to be able to understand what you are saying, then I cannot evaluate it. I would prefer a competitor who speaks slow and understandable arguments with limited excessive pauses as opposed to someone who speaks fast with several pauses and the clarity of what they are saying is blurry.

- Try your best to manage your time wisely ( all your points should be about the same time ): Speeches are preferred to be around 7:00 minutes but if you reach 7:30 you will not be penalized, however make sure not to go over 7:30

- Use a variety of sources in your speech instead of the same sources over and over again

- Preferably when listing sources, list the date and year as well

- In terms of your argument, it should make sense and have three points that logically support it

- No umbrella answer is okay as long as you still have three points that work

- Do not use hand gestures too excessively to the point that it distracts from your speech

**Make me laugh or feel sad during your speech and you will have an advantage**

Overall, extemp should be fun, and I hope you all enjoy it. Good luck everyone! I look forward to listening to some great speeches!

Hi! My email is bowen.james.r@gmail.com, please add me to any email chains

Pronouns: he/him

PF:

Please draw the lines in the debate for me, I'll go off of what the debaters tell me so impact calc is important as well as warranting and drawing the link chains. I don't really believe in Ks, T, or theorys in PF, I'm fine with the latter if there's actual abuse in the round however. Don't be mean in cross, I'll lower your speaks for it. I'm fine with speed, please just warn me ahead of time. I'll also need a heads up on the amount of arguments gonna be run so I can plan out my flows

Extemp:

I'm a big fan of umbrella answers and the three point substructure, other than that just answer the question lol

Speech and Debate is a fun event, please try to keep it as non-toxic and as inclusive as possible :)

My competition background is in both foreign and domestic extemp on a national level. I prioritize content and presentation equally, you can't have a solid extemp speech without both.

Extemp:

- The most important thing is that you answer the question as clearly as possible. This includes previewing your points, signposting throughout, and reviewing your points at the end that links into the conclusion. Adding a clear structure adds to the impact and value of your overall speech.

- Impacts should be diverse and clearly articulated

- Timing should be around 7 minutes; 7:30 only if necessary

- An ideal amount of sources for each point is 2-3. I would like to see more logical appeals rather than emotional. However, if your use of an emotional story precisely conveys your point and adds to the speech then no problem, just don’t make the whole speech based on narrative.

- I don't mind canned intros in Extemp, but at least make them connected to the prompt.

-On trigger/content warnings, I personally don't need one, but fellow competitors may (a TW/CW might be needed for graphic depictions of SA, DV, abuse, etc.). Just use proper caution and be mindful of your audience.

**bonus points if you have a funny or interesting ADG and/or on-tops :)

Public Forum:

yes, email chain vaishnavi.marreddy@gmail.com

- Treat me like a parent judge that has experience with the event

- No spreading! Spreading is just hard to understand and I know PF as an event is straying from its traditional form of speaking and argumentation but the bottom line is, I will not flow your argument if you spread it.

- I'll flow whatever argument you tell me to during round--> implicate your offense and tell me why you are winning

- Winning my vote is pretty simple: I will vote for whoever is the most persuasive --> I suggest you focus on persuasion and the quality of your arguments which means weighing your arguments against the opposing team. I would like if you create a lens to view the round by weighing turns, evidence, uniqueness etc.

Overall debate is supposed to be fun so I am always open to any crazy, out of the way argument you want to run (warning: make sure its understandable thats all!).

Good luck and have fun!

he/they.

president, '23-24 @ king's college london debating society

ex-extemper from westwood and their former speech captain

best at judging bp/parli/wsdc, speech, congress, pf

lots of speaker and judging experience:

in bp, outrounds at eudc, oxford, india pre wudc, open grand finalist @ bristol open, cardiff open, hypothetical open, champion @ pdc, semifinalist @odesa open, grand finalist @ cfo 3.0, finalist @ucl iv pro am, semifinalist @ 3udu open

as a judge:

semifinals panellist @ucl iv '24, gold finals panellist @ paris wsdc '24, silver finals chair @ lse schools, gold finals panel and breaking @ lse x imperial, breaking @ manchester novs, breaking @ zagreb pre wudc and panelled nf

chief adjudicator, imperial juniors '24, exeter open 2024, southampton open 2024

in extemp,

2x tfa, toc, nsda qualifier

quarters @ extemp toc and breaking/5th seed @ uktoc

finalist @ longhorn classic and nova titan

semifinalist @ blue key, bronx, tfa state, uk season opener

quarters @ glenbrooks, stanford

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

if you have a disability or bad wifi or anything you need to tell me before the round, please do. i will not penalize you for anything out of your control as a speaker.

extemp:

tldr; answer the question as best as you can, try to engage me and other members of the audience, have strong evidence to back up your claims.

i judge on content and then on delivery.

i'll only rank you down for delivery if you have errors that impede my ability to understand your speech, or if someone else in the room had content as good as yours but was more conversational and engaging

substructure is essential to build up strong links between your a, b, and i. without those link chains, your points don't answer the question.

make sure you use sources to justify claims and to analyze situations. locals and think tanks are best, but i won't hold you citing dailies against you. i very much appreciate qualified sources and they will advance my opinion of your speech.

i love good agd and creative taglines and transitions.

my standard time signals are five down, in virtual you may time yourself. The extemp triangle is helpful in both in-person and virtual environments, but I totally understand if it is unfeasible when you're behind a laptop screen.

respect the communities and issues you speak about, i will drop you for bigotry.

don't be afraid to run a slightly unorthodox substructure or argument, as franklin roosevelt once said, “it is common sense to take a method and try it. if it fails, admit it frankly and try another. but above all, try something.”

best of luck! this is my favorite event.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

other speech -- lay

i never really did other forms of speech in high school. i'll evaluate impromptus much like i would an extemp speech, just with more of an emphasis on delivery as opposed to content.

as for interpretation and oratory, i'll judge you equally on your presentation and content, and while i don't need trigger warnings before a round, i would appreciate it if you offer them for other judges/competitors in the room.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

pf, tech > truth, flow judge

good with speed/spreading, though if you do I'd prefer that you make a speech doc and send it to me at arjunraman10000@gmail.com

good with theory. i don’t require frontlining in the second rebuttal, but i prefer it. please extend your arguments throughout the debate. weigh weigh weigh weigh weigh. signposting preferable.

i'll evaluate disclosure/para theory.

i try to intervene in round as little as humanly possible, will vote off the flow.s

speaks will probably go from 28.5 to 30 in most cases, only lower if I couldn't understand you or if you were bigoted in round.

in pf, all you need for high speaks from me is to debate ethically and respect your opponents and partner.

strike me if you run tricks.

for a longer version -- check amogh mahambare's paradigm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

congress:

po - know what you’re doing, and you have a place on my ballot; i'll forgive any minor mistakes with regards to precedence or recency. offer time signals to people that want them (not as necessary in virtual), and keep track of speaking time and recency.

everyone else -- giving two good speeches is better than giving three mediocre ones; extemp-level analysis is essential to being on my ballot -- 2 points, at least two sources per point of analysis.

try to make sure there’s a decent aff/neg split and clash as a chamber.

don’t be overly aggressive in cross, just like the other events -- no bigotry

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bp/parli:

i track

i adjudicate using the judging manual in bp and using the wsdc manual for wsdc

paradigms not really a thing in iona, who would've thunk

Westwood '22

Extemper and PFer

Extemp:

Content comes first and it has to at least make sense. There should be a logical flow present in all your points. I have a 2 point rule. In an extemp speech I there are usually 3 points, however, if one of the points makes no sense/doesn't answer the question, I will not give you credit for it. If your point can be easily argued otherwise, or is factually incorrect/misleading but still follows a logical process, I will give you only 0.5 points. If you don't get 2 points, there is very very slim chance that you will get the 1 in the room.

Presentation can really push you to the top. Presentation includes language, voice intonation, expression, and hand gestures. This aspect of extemp is also very important and can help with the understanding of the speech as a whole. I believe that better fluency is usually an indication of better content as well, so be confident in your content and the presentation will come naturally. I will not dock you for a lack of presentational skills, but I could rank you up because of them. After all, this is a speech event.

Time Management plays a final factor. Rather than focusing on whether or not you got under the 7-minute time limit, it's more about the balance of your speech. I value equally spaced points/analysis and speakers who don't give importance to just one point.

PF:

tech>truth, flow judge

Everything needs to be warranted and linked clearly and there need to be clear extensions through every speech or I will consider it dropped. New arguments in the 2nd summary are simply too late. Impact weighing is perhaps the most important part of the debate and I will vote on who won the best impacts. Signpost before speeches. If something is conceded or you want to bring up an important point from the cross, blow it up in a speech. In that way, the cross does matter. If both teams want to skip grand cross that's good with me.

Evidence:

All evidence needs to be warranted and I will not consider assertions at all

warranted evidence > warrants > unwarranted evidence > assertions

I strongly dislike misconstrued evidence. I strongly encourage cut cards, and, to encourage this, I will boost your speaks by 0.2 points if you read non-paraphrased cases. Just show me before the round.

I call for evidence in a couple of scenarios:

1) Someone tells me to read it during a speech

2) There is substantial time spent in the round over what it says

3) Something sounds factually incorrect

4) The way you portray the evidence seems to shift as the round progresses

Progressive Stuff:

Kritik:

I have a general understanding of most criticisms read in debate(i.e. Anti-blackness, South Asian identity, Settler Colonialism, Feminism, Queer/Quare/Kuaerness, and Disability) I think, especially in PF, linking the K to the resolution or a specific argument is highly important. Although I'm not as well-read up as policy or LD debaters, if you understand your criticism and you are willing to do the work to explain and contextualize your offense, you'll probably be fine.

CounterPlans:

While I think counter plans should become a part of PF, the NSDA rules state that no counter plans are allowed and the whole resolution must be debated. Consider changing it into the form of a disad.

Theory/Topicality:

I haven't been a part of too many theory debates, and I have a lot more learning to do. However, for me, it comes down to doing real comparative work on the level of interpretations and standards. It is about answering these questions: what type of norms do we want to set in this activity/topic? Why? Why does it matter if the violation is true? What is the threshold to meet your interpretation? I think innovative or unconventional topicality and theory arguments (on either side) can make for very interesting discussions about the norms of the activity, i.e. arguments about identity, body politics, performativity, agency, boredom, death, simulation, or educational models.

Framework:

I will buy into any framework presented and try to adopt the mindset of the winning framework.

Tabula rasa.

For extempers:

Content is very important-- your points need to be logical, easy to follow, and specific to the question. If you don't explain your content properly, even if I know what you mean, you will probably get ranked down. Treat me like a lay judge that reads dailies.

- Please back stats, info, etc. with credible SOURCES: source name, date with month/day/year

* if you use cool sources like thinktanks, books, etc. you will impress me more than random dailies.

Fluency is important. Make your speech interesting and engaging. I love humor, but anything in general that draws me in is great.

- Timing is kinda important-- if you go way under (<5:30 min) or way over (>7:30) I will likely rank you down. Between 6:50 and 7:00 is *chef's kiss*

* remember extemp triangle!

- If you have a funny AGD and good on-tops, you will impress me.

For impromptu:

Again, fluency is important. Draw me in, make the speech your own. Appropriate humor stands out.

For debate, please add me to email chain: oliviadanyang@gmail.com

- Please keep your own time

Good luck! Y'all got this :)