Hi Debaters,
My email if you decide to start emailchain for evidence sharing

drneeruagarwal@gmail.com

I have judged elementary , middle school, Novice High School and Junior Varsity debate last year. I make unbiased decision even if I have some background knowledge of topic and always open to listening and learning. I believe with time information changes and affects our decision. It's always fun to see how new and pro debaters benefit with the rounds.

I will give points based on what you presented , how well you presented, did you have real content or just tried to pass time with some nonintelligent tricks. I will not hold you responsible for what you did not cover about topic.

I am particular about debate rules:

1. Manage time wisely
2. Do not expect me to intervene during crossfire
3. During cross fire do not try to waste opponent time by beating around the bush, ask precise clear questions
4. Use signposting as your strength and also makes judges job easy
5. I will take speaker points off if any arguments are conceded or if new arguments are brought up later than first summary.
6. Come prepared, decide how you want to share the evidence. Do not assume other team may share evidence the same way (ex. google doc vs chat)
7. I strive to start rounds timely and be respectful of everyone's time and effort.
8. Low point wins are possible, but it has happened once only so far for me (so be confident but not rude).

I can follow decent speed but will prefer someone not to rush to put more in given time and not explain their case /argument properly or have unused time on hand. So pace yourself.

I am looking forward to honest, respectful debates from which both the debaters and I will learn debating and the topic. I am fairly easy going person but particular about respectful debates. I am getting familiar with debate jargons but not a master yet. I prefer to give immediate oral feedback as that may help debaters to improve for next round as well as may be looking at all feedbacks later may not give as much clarity and satisfaction. I do not mind debaters asking questions about my decision as long as it's done in respectful way.

I am learning and evolving with debaters. I debated a little during high school and college and love it now also. So let's keep the fun going. Enjoy the topic and debate process do not focus on winning and loosing. Every round you will learn and get better irrespective of outcome.

Thanks,

Neeru

Hi,

I am an interested parent helping out, with little experience judging.

Please don't speak too fast, moderate speed will be appreciated. Speak clearly. Please be respectful and mindful in the crossfire round, allowing for fluent exchange of questions & responses. Don't speak over each other. Signposting is welcome.

I won't be giving oral feedback. I will be submitting feedback through the judge ballot a few minutes after the debate.

I will be looking for the following

• Clear articulation of assertions & contentions
• Well-developed logic & reasoning in all assertions & responses
• Well articulated, compelling impact and well framed arguments
• Supporting facts, authorities & appeal to emotions
• Logical flow across sections
• Merit & precision of questioning and clarity of defense in cross-fire
• Speaker style (confidence, clarity, modulation, wit, etc.)

Good luck!

Hi! I'm Dana. I debated PF at Potomac Debate Academy in high school, and I'm now a freshman at Princeton.

In round, make sure I can follow your narrative. Signpost and don't speak too fast. Flush out links and weigh impacts. Tell me what I should be voting on and why it is important.

Note: I'm not a fan of theories and Ks.

Please be respectful, I very much take that into consideration when giving speaker points. Thanks!

Hey everybody!

I've been a PF debater for five years. I've also judged numerous tournaments and am familiar with most debate jargon and rules.

I don't like to intervene unless absolutely necessary, tell me why you win the ballot. I don't flow crossfire, so if something important comes up, make sure to bring it up in your speeches.

Firstly, and most importantly, I expect DEBATE, so don't be afraid to come across as aggressive or have direct clash. However, MAKE SURE TO ATTACK THE ARGUMENT, NOT THE PERSON!

Secondly, please extend your arguments and weigh. I know it's hard to collapse on certain arguments and make comparisons, but THIS IS ESSENTIAL. I just want to know why A. your main impact outweighs their impact or B. your contention is more likely/their contention is invalid (ex. Our opponent's contention is non-unique because ...)

Thirdly, evidence is very important, but only if you use it right. If you are going to extend a card, tell me what it is, don't just say something like "Our opponent never responded to our ABCD card" and then not tell me why that card is important.

Fourthly, make sure to explain as much as you can to me, because I don't like to assume things in round.

Fifthly, I DON'T CARE ABOUT SPEED, just make it understandable.

Finally, It's okay to be nervous, everybody else is. You've worked really hard for this, just give it your best shot. Don't be discouraged at any point in the round because the tables could turn very quickly.

Good luck everybody :)

Hello Teams,

I am looking forward to seeing you in today's tournament. I want to share few things about myself. I have been working in the field of business for the last 12 years. I am new to the Public forum debate and this is my second time judging a debate tournament and the first time for a public forum debate. I would prefer speech to be medium-paced and I would look for the arguments the team is bringing forward and how strategic the arguments are. If you ask me if I am nervous, I would say maybe.. it's because I want to ensure that I do my best.

Also, I would request speakers to keep a tab on time too.

Good luck with the tournament.

Best,
Sanghamitra

This is Jamila Banu and this will be my first experience judging any debate competition. I have some exposure to public forum debate but not an expert by any means. I would like you guys not to speak too fast and be clear in your presentation. I am not interested in hearing just statistical data but to convey how the data augments your arguments. I expect you to be assertive in your arguments but not too aggressive. If I feel you are being rude, it will have a negative impact to your scores. Looking forward to hearing a vibrant debate. Good luck guys!

I am a cardiologist in the Washington, DC area and I have no background in debate. I have been a parent judge for 5 years, so I do know some of the basic rules.

Please speak clearly and be respectful with asking and answering questions.

Keep your arguments generally socially acceptable.

I prefer probable arguments as opposed to farfetched arguments.I want to hear a good debate. Avoid repeating what others have said. Make sure you address previous speakers and expound on arguments.

At the end of the session, I have to rank you and that is difficult, so please talk to me when I am finished and not prior to that.

Style:

I understand how important speaks are in avoiding the 4-2 screw, and I will try to be generous towards debaters’ totals.

I can take speed, but I will shout clear if words begin to slur together or if a debater is hyperventilating. At that point, listening becomes too taxing and counterproductive to hosting a debate. Jokes, idioms, rhetorical flourishes are highly appreciated.

Offline/Off the clock roadmaps are not encouraged unless you are about to attempt something very different in terms of speech structure.

Evidence:

Crossfire is the best time to call for cards and I will consider such requests after the round. More often than not, card calls occur when there is a conflict of evidence, and thus locking horns about it is counterproductive and is best left for right after the round. I will allow debaters to remind me of which cards they wanted me to call after the round.

I reserve the right to call any piece of evidence. Additionally, I would like to see the entire pdf/html file for any card called. Do not forget, you can use the internet to access SAVED links (refer to page 26 of the NSDA manual, Piloted Guidelines, Part A, section 2). Evidence that cannot be produced is going to be weighed as much as the personal word of the debater. Statistics should be cited with some context and their methodology explained.

Argumentation:

Frameworks in PF typically contain little novel and are little more than a roadmap. Instead, try to give me what you want me to weigh in the round in advance (utilitarian vs. deontological ethics, weigh lives in present vs future, etc.). Setting the tone for the round is beneficial for all parties involved.

Point out tight/abusive points in the next available speech. Putting off such claims will make them seem like a cop-out.

I judge by what is on my flow, and I will do my best to write down every topical argument made in the round. I understand that time in PF is very limited, so it is not critical to extend points over and over again. If debaters bring up a point in the constructive or rebuttal and it goes unchallenged, it will be considered. Weighing and doing the argument calculus is FAR more important than bringing up the same tired points for four rounds.

Summary and Final Focus should tie together, with partners making cohesive, linked arguments on how to weigh the round.

In terms of the kinds of arguments given, I am open to everything and anything as long as it is not offensive and within the spirit of courteous debate. Creativity is welcome!

First time judge here but I have been listening to enough debate rounds from my high school kid

You don't need to speak super fast.. make sure you are clear and provide a quick summary towards the end of your speech.

Please be respectful. Debate is supposed to be fun. If you are rude or bully, your team will suffer.

No harm to crack one joke here and there, make sure those jokes are appropriate. You will gain 1 brownie point if you make your speech fun and convincing.

Most importantly, enjoy the process. This is just the beginning of your debate journey. Pay attention to what your opponents say. Take notes! I can guarantee you will get better each round.

lay judge

will evaluate all arguments (tricks, friv theory, K's etc.)

no bigotry

First time judging. I am looking for confident speakers. I'd pay attention to eye contact, and your body languages.

Good luck debating. Let's learn this together!

UPDATED for Milpitas 2023: I don't judge frequently anymore nor do I really know what the norms in the circuit are these days, but I'm down for whatever both teams agree on. Overall, please use common sense. I can probably comfortably flow up to around 275 wpm with clarity and signposting.

About Me: Debated PF and Parli for 3 years for Nueva, was ~tech~, I now coach for Potomac.

TLDR: Debate is a game, tech > truth. Debate however you would like as long as you are not being morally reprehensible or exclusionary. Ask before the round if you have specific questions and put me on the email chain even though I probably won't read anything (bncheng@uchicago.edu).

Super Short Version:

1. I am best at judging technical case debate (and probably enjoy it more) but I will adapt to you if you choose to pursue an alternative style. Speed/prog are both fine.

2. I prefer cut cards/direct quotes - you can paraphrase but don't misconstrue evidence. Don't be afraid to call out an opponent for evidence ethics.

3. I prefer that at a minimum you respond to all offensive arguments read in the previous speech. I won't necessarily consider arguments dropped, but I have a much higher threshold for responses if they come later.

Full Prefs:

1. WEIGHING: Probability weighing is not real - the link debate is the probability weighing.

- "cLaRiTY of Link/Impact" weighing is not also real. I will both not evaluate it and also drop your speaks each time you say it. A team does not win because their impact has a number.

- Please don't only drop buzzwords on me. Words like magnitude/scope/timeframe don't mean anything to me without actual comparison done between the arguments. Similarly, if different weighing arguments are unresolved PLEASE METAWEIGH.

2. EVIDENCE: All evidence needs to be cut with citations. Do not send your opponents a link I will give you a 25. I will call for cards if they are relevant and disputed without resolution.

- I will give you an L25 if I notice/your opponent points out misconstruction that is significant. How much I discount a piece of evidence increases linearly with how sketchy it is.

- I'm lazy and I don’t flow authors. So don’t just extend author names, extend warrants too because its good debate.

3. PROGRESSIVE: I have experience with most progressive arguments, but primarily in theory, I haven't really engaged with K debate since graduating so while I can probably still evaluate the debate, you'll want to slow down, simplify things, and do extra warranting (especially if it's anything nuanced i.e. not security or cap).

- I don't have any defaults - you need to read the arguments (yes this means K/Theory = Case if no a priori argument is read). If arguments necessary for the decision are not read I will intervene up to a threshold and then presume if unresolved.

- Please don't read stuff to harvest ballots against novices - use common sense. This also means that my threshold for "we can't engage" responses increases as the "assumed" level of the debate increases (i.e. I'm not going to give you sympathy in quarters at a bid tournament)

- UPDATE FOR THEORY: IMO it's impossible to go for both a shell and case in FF effectively - you just don't have enough time. If you're going to read theory, either collapse on it or extend no RVIs and kick the shell - don't make a half-hearted attempt at going for both.

4. PRESUMPTION (is this still a thing idk): My default ROTB is to vote for the team that did the better debating. I think defaults like “first speaking team has a disadvantage” are intervention, so if no team has offense, neither of you debated better. You can obviously argue that one team should "get" presumption, but absent any such args, I will flip a coin (aff - heads, neg - tails).

5. POSTROUNDING: totally ok as long as you're respectful, I think it's educational and I'm happy to defend my decision. Also happy to discuss after the round through email. I will buy you food or something if you can convince me that I was wrong (unfortunately I can't change the decision sorry).

I competed in policy on the national circuit in high school. After college, I coached policy for a high school circuit team. I have been coaching PF for the last three years. I think everything that happens in a debate round is fair game for debate. I'll evaluate the round how you tell me to. I do not want to do work for you on the flow. Please impact out your args and explain why your framing matters most.

Potomac Debate, Sophomore @ River Hill HS

be respectful or instant L.

tech>truth.

topicality>.

clarity>.

don't like cp.

K's have to be very concise or i won't accept.

roadmap ur speeches.

don't talk TOO fast.

have fun!

contact me @ alexzhangcui@gmail.com

I've done nats circuit public forum for 2 years. I have 0 topic knowledge on this topic.

Tech>Truth

- Add me to the email chain Runzhec@uchicago.edu

In-round:

-Frontline in 2nd rebuttal

-No new arguments in 2nd summary or final

-Anything in final focus must be in summary(extend ur link chain), defense isn't sticky, except new weighing is fine in 1st final

-I do not flow cross fire, if you want something from cross say it in a speech

-Please signpost

- Please collapse and do COMPARATIVE weighing!!!

-Evidence ethics: I will only evaluate quality of evidence if I am told to

-Speed: If you go over 250wpm I will need a speech doc

-Theory: If you run theory please follow your own interp in your other rounds too. No frivolous theory please(ask beforehand)

-Ks: I haven't evaluated K debate that much, please don't run it

Speaker points(you can still get 30s even if you do none of these):

I will increase your speaks if...

-If you read cut cards(tell me if you do)

-Give brief off time road map

-Camera is angled so I can see your full face

Lose speaks if...

-Ur discriminatory in any way

-Talk over your opponents in cx

-Bad evidence ethics

-Say an arg goes conceded when it wasn't

-Takes over a min to find evidence

Glhf :)

I regularly read policy pieces from trusted sources, so I do have good general background knowledge for Public Forum debate topics. Trained as a scientist, I will evaluate the round based on whether you have strong and relevant factual evidence, whether you use sound logic, and whether you clearly communicate your case. Sharp and on-point rebuttal and crossfire are plus. I expect everyone to be respectful no matter how tense the debate becomes. I strongly discourage the debaters from being over-aggressive in tone/language or asking questions unrelated to the debate topic.

Please speak clear and not too fast! Keep track of your time.

Be nice to your opponents and your partner!

Let's have a good time.

Hello teams,

Iam looking for clarity and constructive arguments.

Be nice to opponent team and let us have fun.

All the best

I am a first time debate judge. (3/13/2021)

Nothing is complex, simply a combination of basic stuff.

Complex arguments conveyed with simplicity.

Too much data just for the sake of it, and not connecting/ explaining the data makes a poor argument.

Quality of speech has points, thought quality of arguments and exploration counts higher.

I've debated for four years at Potomac, I'm currently a freshman at Wootton HS. This is my first time judging

1. Theories, counter-plans, kritiks - I'm not good with these, just stay on topic

2. In CX - be respectful, don't interrupt each other and don't waste time

3. I won't flow new arguments made in summary or in CX

4. Explain your weighing mechanisms and why I should choose yours

5. extend arguments you want to win on through all the speeches

6. don't talk too fast, I might miss some stuff you said

Hi! I'm Navin and hopefully, I'll be judging you today!

Some things you should keep in mind:

1) Please weigh your arguments, preferably as early as rebuttal. Weighing must be comparative (don't just state how big your impact is. Actually make a comparison against the other team's impacts).

2) Have a clear narrative from the beginning. From second rebuttal onward, it should be clear what arguments you are going for. I don't like shifty strategies where teams go for arguments that they only spent 10 seconds on in a previous speech.

3) Warrant your responses. I will not be compelled to believe a piece of evidence if you just say "x author says this therefore it is true." I need a justification behind the claim. If you want me to consider responses and/or arguments, warrants and links need to be extended in every speech.

4) Speed is not an issue for me. Just send a speech doc.

5) Evidence quality is important but it is the other team's responsibility to call out bad evidence ethics, not mine. I'm not going to drop you if you misrepresent evidence but I will be less compelled to believe your argument.

6) Civility in the debate space is extremely important to me. Do not be rude or make any offensive comments. Some snarky behavior I can handle. Repeated disrespectful comments and behavior will affect your speaker points and maybe even results.

7) Progressive arguments are not my cup of tea. However, as far as I see it, they function like any other argument, so as long as you structure it like a regular arg, I should be able to understand and flow.

8) Debate shouldn't be as stressful of an activity as it is. Too many people treat it as a competition at the expense of the enjoyment of the activity and the opportunity to share your beliefs. Persuasion and appeal are core parts of debate and will help you in the real world. So remember, have fun! :)

Good luck!

Questions before round? Contact me at navindurbhakula@college.harvard.edu or Navin Durbhakula on Facebook.

Here are the things that I value most in a debate tournament:

1) Be respectful!

2) Be clear on your reasoning!

3) I am particularly interested in how you can elaborate the impacts.

hey! long paradigms hurt my eyes so this is gonna be kinda short.

i think i am flow.

tech>truth

i'm a high school debater currently a sophomore but i've been debating for a couple years.

why is this funny to u ruth. stop laughing...

general:

1. i will evaluate any argument brought up by teams, won't do extra work, pretty self-explanatory

2. i am good with speed

3. usually won't call for ev, but if u tell me to i will

4. any sensitive topics pls read a TW

5. don't be sexist, ableist, racist, homophobic or exclusive in any way, i will intervene and most likely drop u. pls never compromise the safety of a debater :)

round:

1. signpost so I know where you are

2. good with roadmaps, just make it quick.

3. collapse. i'll only evaluate comparative weighing

4. second rebuttal pls frontline

5. rebuttalists, go line by line it's easier for both of us.

6. whatever you want me to flow and consider a voter in the round should be in summary and extended into ff. Defense sticky for 1st summary.

theory/prog

if ur case is triggering, PLEASE read a tw AND an opt out option.

i have hit theory but my rfd won't be great.

good speaks

good strat and fluency

make fun of ruth dai and her egg obsession and send video evidence.

use grand cross to roast lindsey wu's silver toc flex on her rfd.

take a series of pictures of abigail hill fixing her hair (it will happen a lot) and send pic evidence.

if u crack an amazing appropriate joke during cross and make me laugh

but i generally give high speaks tho

extra stuff

I'll always disclose

please time yourselves. I usually time but just end up forgetting.

If you have any further questions feel free to email me, angiegu822@gmail.com

post round me if u want to

biggest takeway is to roast ruth and have fun :))

Yo, Junior at Churchill. Not very good, so I apologize in advance for sucky flowing. Email is liamthrowaway0@gmail.com

Pronouns are he/him/his.

TLDR: Tech > Truth, Line-by-Line good, Signposting good, writing my ballot good, progressive good. 

Voting off the flow, defualt to death bad. bigotry bad. All the bad practices like paraphrasing and such imo are just strategies that I believe are academic abominations but won't intervene on. 

Novice/MS/ES: If you show me a flow after the round ill bump your speaks!

progressive good, theory good, k good, although I don't have much experience on these. If you are going to run k I probably won't understand how the neg creates a new something something something pedagogy or whatever that means, so when extending the argument, try not to just spit jargon from case word for word. I'll evaluate anything idc.

Post-rounding is cool. Always open to getting insight on the round. 

Definetely won't catch everything with speed, but I will do my best and still encourage speed. Go as fast as you like, that's for you to decide and not me. If I feel the need I'll clear you.

If a response or argument made in the previous speech is not responded to, it is conceded. This applies for all speeches except constructives. Everything in ff should be in summary. Case is auto extended through rebuttal so frontline arguments that were "kicked" in second rebuttal if you are first summary. I will vote on them if there is no back half response in first summary and argument is extended in second summary. 

Be nice. I won't vote on your attitude but being mean in cross doesn't help you right?

Can't remember anything else rn, if you need to know smt just ask. If you think something in this paradigm is a bad practice for judges, tell me after the round or whenever is conveinent. I would love to hear your thoughts.

I am very laid back judge, but here are a few things I would love to see:

1. Give me a roadmap; even something as simple as "it's going to be aff then neg" is greatly appreciated. If your speech is going to jump all over flow, be transparent about that at the top and signpost as you go. Overall, please be purposeful about signposting/claims and slow down for those statements. I need to be able to follow on the flow as this is the primary factor in my decision.

2. If anyone is using a framework, do NOT drop it post constructive or rebuttal. Once framework is introduced, how each side weighs into that throughout the round is crucial.

3. Utilize crossfire. Do not use that time to solely ask clarifying questions. Be offensive (even in the first cross), that's what we're here for. It's not going to win you the round, but it'll give the round depth.

4. FOR PF FIRST SPEAKERS SPECIFICALLY: The summary speech is the easiest way to win your round. Do NOT just merely extend every little thing your second speaker said; that's useless. Do NOT spend the entire time simply refuting your opponent's responses to your case. Give me a worlds/comparative analysis & weigh every impact. Defending your case can be integrated into these big picture analyses. This speech needs to only hone in on a handful of essential arguments. Be intentional with those two minutes.

5. Second speaking team, first speakers: if you want to dedicate some time in your constructive to rebuttal, DO IT. Keep the round entertaining.

6. Keep track of your prep time. I will also be keeping track, but you should be keeping track of each other as well.

7. If anyone is using hands off prep to get a piece of evidence, DO NOT PREP. I will down you.

8. Avoid blippy responses. I value the quality of your argument over the quantity.

9. If an argument seems to be a wash between opposing pieces of evidence, be prepared to show me the evidence at the end of the round.

10. I vote based on a combination of who won the flow, who outweighed, and who was the most intentional with their time.

If any of this is confusing, just ask me for clarification before the round! :)

Some background stuff about me that you don't need to know: I debated for Winston Churchill High School for four years, obtaining eleven bids to the tournament of champions. I octo-finaled the 2022 Gold Tournament of Champions and reached late elimination rounds at 2023 NSDA Nationals. I've coached at NSD/Delta, Public Forum Academy, VBI, and Potomac Debate Academy.

Short Version:

Please give me good warranting, implicate your arguments, and PLEASE weigh. Like seriously- please weigh.

Feel free to go as fast as you want, but if you spread, just send a speech document.

If you do not extend your link, I will be sad.

Extend defense in summary.

Things I Do Not Like:

- rude or offensive behavior (i.e. sexist, homophobic, racist, transphobic, xenophobic, etc.)

- complaining about your opponents calling evidence because it "slows down the round." It's not their fault if you don't have your cards organized

- new overviews in summary

--- SOME RANDOM STUFF ABOUT WEIGHING ---

Probability weighing is kind of fake.

--- SPEECHES ---

Crossfire:

I will listen to crossfire, but I won't vote off of anything said in cross unless brought up in another speech.

Signposting:

Do it, please. Thanks.

Rebuttal:

Im fine with a ton of offensive/DAs, just please warrant, weigh, and implicate them. Weigh links. Second rebuttal NEEDS to frontline.

Final Focus:

First final focus can do new weighing (within reason).

--- LOGISTICS ---

Speech Times:

Please say within speech times. Going 5-10 seconds over is alright if you are finishing your thought. Do not go, "can I finish my sentence?" and then proceed to "finish" the longest sentence in the word.

Content Warnings:

If you plan on reading something potentially triggering, read a content warning. Please read an opt-out of a triggering case. Have an alternative case ready to run.

Post-rounding:

Do what you want... I don't really care.

--- HOW TO GET HIGH SPEAKS ---

- show me your cat before round. if you don't have a cat, you should get a cat. 10/10 recommend.

- if you hold a pet during speech, you will get a 30 (probably).

- a reference to the Lorax.

- make a dad joke in a speech or in crossfire. (i.e. Q: what did the fish say when it swam into the wall? A: dam. don't poach this one, use your own)

- Flow in crayon.

--- PROGRESSIVE DEBATE ---

Theory:

Go for it.

Kritiks:

I haven't run Ks in the past, so run these at your own risk. I am NOT the best judge to run Kritiks with, though I will try my best to evaluate them. I am most familiar with imperialism and security Ks, but I'm willing to evaluate other Ks.

Tricks:

I have no idea how to evaluate these, so if you run them and I drop you, its your fault.

If you have any questions about this paradigm, feel free to ask before round.

Hi, I am Rishi Iyer! I am a high-schooler at Wootton and I have been doing PF debate for more than a year. I am familiar with debate jargon and I am ok with speed but please make your taglines and impacts clear.

You can paraphrase evidence but should state the source and if someone calls a card, you should be able to give it in a timely manner.

Remember to respond to your opponent's arguments and also weigh. Tell me who won the round and why. Collapse on contentions in your summary speech.

I do not flow cross so if you want to bring something up, tell me in your speech.

Also, please time your speeches and also your prep time.

Please be polite and also have fun! :)

Lay(ish) judge: No progressive arguments!

Do not spread.

tech>truth

Be clear about warrants, and weigh comparatively.

I listen but don't vote off crossfire - if you want me to consider something, bring it up in speech.

I don't remember tags.

Have fun, and BE RESPECTFUL!!

Organize: signpost, extend and collapse.

read content warnings if your argument contains sensitive topics. send out an anonymous google form so that everyone can anonymously consent to the debate.

- don't spread

- not good at prog but i'll evaluate

RFD FOR POTOMAC INTRAMURALS

- be nice

- signpost (tell me where you are on the flow or i will become very sad)

- i don't have a lot of experience with prog but i'll do my best to evaluate it (i've hit it a few times) --> i would say that i'd rather not judge a prog round unless there's a serious violation

- tech > truth, but if an argument is super unrealistic i will accept weaker responses for it

- probably won't call evidence unless you tell me to in speech

- i don't flow card names, so extend warrants with it

- frontline in second rebuttal (or at least respond to any offense)

back half

- collapse (when you choose one argument and explain why it's the most important one in the round/ why you are winning)

- weigh comparatively

- no new args in second summary/ff (newly implicated weighing in 1ff is ok)

- dropped defense is sticky for first summary, but i think it's still a good idea to extend it

Public Forum (See below for LD Specifics)

I debated for Mission San Jose High School from 2013-2017 and was relatively active on the Public Forum circuit in my junior and senior years.

I have included my preferences below. If you have questions that are not answered below, ask them before the round begins.

- I evaluate arguments on the flow.

- I am a tabula rasa judge; I will vote on almost any argument that is properly warranted and impacted. If an argument makes no sense to me, it's usually your fault and not mine. In the absence of an explicit framework, I default to util.

- I do not take notes during crossfire and will only be paying attention selectively. If something important comes up, mention it in your next speech.

- I will typically only vote on arguments if they are extended in both the summary and the final focus.

- No new evidence is permitted in the second summary (it's fine in first summary). This is to encourage front-lining and to discourage reading new offense in second rebuttal. Additionally, new carded analysis in the second summary forces the final focus to make new responses and deviate away from an initial strategy. The only exception I will make is if you need to respond to evidence introduced in the first summary. New analytical responses and criticisms of evidence are fine.

- I try to be visibly/audibly responsive, e.g. I will stop flowing and look up from my computer when I don't understand your argument and I'll probably nod if I like what you're saying. I will also say 'CLEAR' if you are not enunciating or going too fast and 'LOUDER' if you are speaking too quietly.

- I will only ask to see evidence after the round in one of three scenarios. (1) I was told to call for a card in a speech (2) Both teams disagree over what the card says and it is never fully resolved (3) I'm curious and want to steal your evidence.

- I usually won't keep track of your speech and prep time. It is your job to keep your opponents accountable. If there is any particular reason you cannot keep time, please let me know and I will try to accommodate.

- I will evaluate theory and Kritiks, as long as they are well warranted.

- I evaluate the debate on an offense/defense paradigm. This does not mean you can wave away your opponent's defensive responses by saying "a risk of offense always outweighs defense," because terminal and mitigatory defense are not the same thing. Terminal defense points out flaws in the logic of an argument while mitigatory defense accepts an argument as a logical possibility and attacks its probability or magnitude. I personally dislike 'risk of offense' type arguments because I think they encourage lazy debating, but I will happily vote on them if they are well executed. You must answer responses that indict the validity of your link chain if you want to access offense from an argument.

- I reserve the right to drop you for offensive/insensitive language, depending on its severity. Some things are more important than winning a debate round.

- If you plan to discuss sensitive issues such as suicides, depression, sexual assault, etc., please issue trigger warnings at the top of your case.

- Please be nice.

P.S. It's true, I stole this from Max (my better half)

LD Stuff:

- I have not watched circuit LD in years, so please don't go faster than ~225 wpm while speaking extemporaneously. If you are reading off of a speech doc, I really don't care.

- I love a good K debate, but many K debates tend to not be good ones. If you cannot conversationally explain your K to someone you know outside of debate, then you probably don't understand it and aren't using it in a compelling way in the round.

- That being said, I am still a tabula rasa judge; I will vote on almost any argument that is topical, properly warranted and impacted. If an argument makes no sense to me, it's usually your fault and not mine. Don't shy away from running anything in front of me, but if you go for it, it must be clearly explained and implicated in your last rebuttal.

If you have concerns, you can reach me at keshavkundassery99@gmail.com

Email: itsedriclei@gmail.com

^ please put me on the email chains, feel free to contact with either if you need something, like speaks or whatnot

I was a PF debater and I've debated PF for around 4 years

I’m gonna disclose and give an rfd because I really hate judges that don’t

Tech > truth so call people out on incorrect things, don't just assume I'll intervene

If you weigh in rebuttal I will give you +0.5 speaker points

I don't flow cross, if you want me to vote on something said during cross, please say it in the next speech

I'm fine with progressive debate, I will evaluate it

Email: georgialevine@gmail.com

^ please put me on the email chains, feel free to contact with either if you need something, like speaks or whatnot

THIS IS A LONG PARADIGM AND I PUT A QUICK TL;DR BUT I RECOMMEND YOU SKIM THE FULL THING

Background on me:

• she/her

• Varsity debater (3 years of modified parli, 3 years of PF)

• HS senior

• I always disclose and give rfd (time permitting)

• I've been judging for 3 years

• I’m tech > truth so call people out on incorrect things, don't just assume that I'll intervene

TL;DR (I recommend you actually read/skim the full thing though)

Frontline in second rebuttal, you can run theory but not Ks, you can talk fast but don't spread, weigh!!!, trigger warnings if applicable

Round things:

No: (as in put "don't" in front of all of these)

• Frontline in second summary instead of second rebuttal. I know it’stechnically allowed but it’s not good debating, don't do it.

• Run Ks; tbh I do not understand how these are run well enough for you to be able to successfully run them with me, so just don't.

• Expect me to flow what you say during cross. If it's important, say it in a speech (cross does affect speaks, though!)

• Read possibly triggering content without trigger warnings. Please read trigger warnings before the speech if needed and offer an opt-out, it's an important norm to set!

Yes:

• Talking fast is fine (but don't spread, which I define as 300wpm. Stay at like ~250wpm or so max please! Especially with topic-specific abbreviations/terms, if it's r1 of the tournament or early in the month I might not know right away!)

• Weigh. Please don't make me do this myself, use clear and signposted weighing mechanisms that actually compare your cases (do not be 'two ships passing in the night'! interact!)

• Off-time roadmaps aren’t required and I’m not gonna take off speaks if you don’t do them, but for summary especially it’s nice to know what part of the flow you’re starting on

• Signpost! If you're just reading a straight block of text without any headlines or sign posting it is 10x easier for me to miss a response. Number & name your responses! (i.e. "on contention 1, I have 3 responses. first is a de-link [blah blah blah]")

• Repeat data points in multiple speeches if they're important

• Use warranting/analytics, not just random cards that don’t explain why something is true/false

• Running theory is fine (I'm not always the biggest fan of disclosure/paraphrase but if you're a real believer in it then feel free to run it and, as long as it's argued well, I won't just vote against it!)

• Also, defense is sticky (so you don't have to extend defense 2nd summary if you don't wanna waste time)

How to get speaks: (default to 28)

• Let your opponent talk in cross

• +0.5 (i.e. default to 28.5) - Tell me your favorite anything (ice cream flavor, color, movie/show, song, etc.) before the round so I know you read this (you can tell me on zoom chat if you'd prefer)

Hi! I'm Anita (she/her), a freshman at Northwestern University. I recently graduated from National Cathedral School in Washington D.C., where I debated Public Forum for four years. I'm definitely not a lay judge but i'm also not super comfortable with speed/prog. If you have any questions, feel free to let me know! My email is anitali2002@yahoo.com.

Please keep track of prep! Also I don't flow card names so if you say "extend Bob," i'm not gonna know what you're referring to.

Some things I like:

· Second Rebuttal has to frontline everything you're collapsing on and address all turns your opponents put on your case or concede to the delink.

· Weighing is super important! Weighing needs to be comparative (don’t just tell me why your impacts are important, tell me why your impacts are more important than your opponent’s impacts). Please start weighing in summary. No new weighing in Second FF.

· Please signpost + give off time road maps! Tell me what you're responding to.

· Please explain your arguments! Don’t just read statistics and then expect that to stand on itself, explain to me why that statistic is true. (warrants are important!)

· If you want me to evaluate something, it needs to be in speech and extended across all speeches

· In second half, tell me what you're winning off of, whyyou’re winning, and tell me why I should be voting for you!

. 1st summary is the last speech where I will accept new arguments. New weighing and cross-apps are still okay after tho. New implications? I'll think about it.

. PLEASE make sure impacts are terminalized and quantified!

Theories/Ks

· I don’t really understand Ks and Theories well so if you do run one please explain it well and in a manageable speed.

· If I feel like you’re running theory/ a weird overview/underview just to get a easy win, the chance of me voting for it is pretty low, especially if your opponents point out that it's abusive and explain why. But if you’re running theory because your opponents are actually being abusive, I can vote for it.

Behavior

· There’s a difference between being assertive and being aggressive. If I see you being overly aggressive, especially during cross, I’ll take off speaks and I’ll comment on it in my RFD. Also it can decrease your chances of winning.

· If you’re speaking quickly and make sure you ask your opponents if that's okay. I will try to flow to the best of my ability but I will most likely end up missing stuff. Having a speech doc is not an excuse to speak as fast as you want. I will only look at your speech doc for the duration of the speech.

.I'll only look at a card if you tell me to look at it.

. If you incorporate a tiktok dance or kpop choreo into a speech, I will increase your speaks up to 3 points.

. If you can guess my BTS bias or Blackpink bias, I will boost your speaks (prob only like 0.5 max lol)

my email is joanneli183@gmail.com

flay

if you're gonna go faster than 200wpm, send speech doc

spreading = bad

signpost

collapse, extend, weigh

warrant everything out, card dump = bad

don't use crossfire as a rebuttal, ask questions

progressive debate is cool

keep track of your own time

be respectful

This is my first time judging the activity in a minute, I'm not familiar with all the acronyms associated with this topic yet, so don't assume I will know them. Please give holistic arguments concerning the entire round including but not limited to: weighing the different issues against each other, and explaining what you think with evidence.

I have done Public Forum debate for an amount of time.

General:

- Tech > Truth > Tech > Truth > Tech > Truth

- Speaks range is 27 to 30.

Speaking:

- Speak loud enough so that I can hear you so I can flow what you are saying.

- Spread at your own risk.

Cards:

- I will call cards after round if it plays a decently sized role in my vote.

- Prep time will be run for the team calling the card as soon as they receive the card.

- If it is obvious that the opposing team is unable to produce a stated card, it will be dropped from the flow.

Prep time:

- I trust that each team will account for their own and their opponent's prep time. Feel free to interrupt if they go over their limit.

- Don't steal prep. Example: Calling a card and then proceeding to prep while the opposing team looks for the card, without taking prep yourself.

- If the opposing team is stealing prep, call them out right there and then.

Timing:

- I will time, but you should too.

- There is a 10 second grace period after the time is up for you to finish your sentence. After that 10 seconds, all words will be disregarded.

- If you continue to ignore the timer, speaks will be deducted.

Theory:

- Truth > Tech (kinda)

Speeches:

- Off time road maps should be simple. Signposting should do the rest.

Case:

- Respond to theory in second constructive.

- Not much preference otherwise.

- 30 speaks if you read more than 10 contentions.

Rebuttal:

- If you want to gain offense off turns, you have to contextualize your impacts.

- Try to number your responses (eg. On their C1, 3 responses. 1. abc. 2. def. 3. ghi.)

- When frontlining in rebuttal or first summary, just tell me what response number you are on. You don't really have to elaborate on what the response says.

- You MUST frontline in second rebuttal. Unless you want to drop case...?

- If your opponents read an unholy amount of turns on an arg and nothing else, you can read defense against your own arg. It's kinda funny.

- Collapsing in rebuttal is cool.

- Weigh.

Summary:

- Arguments not brought up in Summary will be dropped. In other words, DEFENSE (and offense) IS NOT STICKY.

- Don't bring up new points, evidence, or arguments in 2nd Summary (unless it is a backline) or beyond.

- I will drop any new points that the opponents bring up. Feel free to call them out for it in speech or after round.

- Weigh.

FF:

- Anything that you want me to vote off of must be mentioned in FF.

- Spend a good amount of time on comparative weighing.

Cross:

- Meh, I don't flow cross. Use it strategically though.

- Anything you want me to flow in cross should be brought up in future speeches.

Additional Notes:

- I will probably disclose unless I am told specifically not to.

- Feel free to challenge me on my decision.

- High speaks if you bring me chocolate.

Some background:

I did PF throughout high school and parliamentary debate (APDA) at the University of Maryland. I've coached students in PF, Parli, LD, and Policy and I've judged all debate formats, though I'm most up to date with PF.

Some general things:

1. Don't be rude.

2. Rounds are evaluated based on argumentation. Speaks are evaluated based on contribution to the ballot.

3. I can handle speed as long as you remain coherent. I will never intentionally penalize you for spreading but you take on an increasing risk that I miss something on the flow the faster you speak. Send me a speech doc if you want to be safe: thnliu288@gmail.com

4. I will stop flowing when time is up (yes, you can finish your sentence). Keep track of each other's prep time.

5. I don't flow cross but will pay attention. For me, cross often helps clarify things (remember, I'm not an expert in the topic you're debating). If there's something from cross you'd like me to evaluate in my decision, bring it up in your speech.

Some notes on debate and flow

1. Please signpost and road-map. Telling me where you are on the flow will ensure that I am also there.

2. Tech > truth. The further from "truth" your argument strays though, the lower the threshold I have for what qualifies as a response. For instance, "no they can't" is an acceptable response to "elephants can fly".

3. I (tend to) only evaluate arguments made in the speech where they belong. Constructive arguments belong in the opening speech. Responses should be made in the first speech they can be made in (generally the subsequent speech). New arguments don't belong in the final speech.

4. Extend (and frontline) the offense you want me to flow through. If you forget to extend it, I'll probably forget to vote on it. Blippy extensions are fine in principle, but often insufficient for a ballot in practice. The more you think I should prioritize an argument, the more speech time you should allocate to it.

5. I will only call cards if you explicitly ask me to and they matter for my decision. Hint: they almost never do.

6. Tell me how to weigh arguments or I will weigh them myself. I'm bad at weighing.

Specific argument preferences/biases

1. I am receptive to pretty much any type of argument, so long as you tell me how I should evaluate it.

2. Progressive arguments (Ks, theory) are cool. However, I offer no guarantee to keep up to date with the latest acronyms or terminology, so err on the side of explaining things more thoroughly.

a. Be very explicit when telling me how to evaluate the argument. This is especially true for anything pre-fiat - if you don't tell me what I should do (and warrant why), I'll probably do something you didn't want me to.

b. I prefer "drop the argument" to "drop the debater". I'll consider whatever you run, but I'm more inclined to buy the former.

c. Used to be categorically against RVIs, have come around somewhat. I'm down to vote on them, but it's context dependent.

d. Still very against tricks, very receptive to theory on tricks bad. If I have to vote on them, you are almost certainly getting a low speak win.

3. Tabula rasa is fake. Debate involves a common pool of knowledge assumed to be true unless challenged. If challenged, it becomes another argument to be evaluated in the round. For transparency, my "default settings" are: policymaker role of the ballot, debates should be fair and educational, the world exists, science is correct, the earth is flat, words have meanings, consequences matter, equality good, rationality real, people have free will. Feel free to make arguments challenging these assumptions, but keep in mind that you incur the burden of proof.

4. Feel free to ask questions before the round. I don't claim to be perfectly unbiased, but I am very willing to clarify any pre-existing beliefs I may be bringing into the round.

5. My gut is not your gut. If you ask me to gut check something or rely on my intuitions, I'll do that but you may not like the outcome. The safe thing to do is just make warranted arguments.

6. If you say "baba yetu" in your speech, I'll sky your speaks.

yes add me on the email chain: matthew.liu.yue@gmail.com

general stuff

1. tech over truth, run nuke war, run dedev, go nuts, although i will drop you for running blatantly racist, sexist, or otherwise offensive args

2. be a decent person

3. crossfire is dumb, you can use grand cross for prep if both teams feel like it

4. frontline turns in second rebuttal

5. no sticky defense you have 3 minutes

6. stuff in final focus has to be in summary, so please remember to extend your link story

7. if you spread you better give me a speech doc beforehand. i do not want to try hard to understand you

8. i don't care what you're wearing

9. good warrant > card without warrant

10. if you don't signpost and jump all over the flow, i will stop trying to follow you at some point

11. tell me where you're going on the flow before speeches

Weighing

1. please weigh by summary (maybe even earlier if you're feeling spicy) or i will be very sad

2. do meta weighing, even after doing impact calc

3. link level weighing is valid

4. i default to util if no one gives me anything to work with

Progressive stuff

1. theory is fine if you know how to run it

2. don't run tricks please unless you are really good at explaining them

3. k's are also fine if you know how to run it

4. i will be annoyed if you run a bunch of theory and just drop it by summary

Speaker points

i'll probably give good speaks because speaks are dumb unless something really weird happens

i'll boost your score by a point or two if you take prep time just to set up a table tote before a speech or flow with highlighters

automatic 30 if you send me food (food must arrive before i submit my ballot)

according to the authorities i give 28.5+ for people i think are going to break so do with that what you will

Current freshman at Georgetown, debated four years for Winston Churchill.

Standard tech judge, simple preferences:

• Please don't spread or speak too fast. I would very much prefer quality over quantity.
• Please weigh! Weighing helps determine my ballot 99% of the time, so if neither team weighs, I'll have to intervene, which is almost never a good thing. Doesn't have to start in rebuttal, but at least in summary.
• Extend your arguments properly including uniqueness, link, and impact. It's going to be very hard for me to vote on arguments that aren't extended with all 3.
• Warrant and implicate your arguments. Don't just make claims and then read an impact.

General

I am a coach and a flay judge but judged PF for many years.

- DON'T SPEAK FAST OR SPREAD.

- Yes, I want to be on the email chain. vaibhav_mahajan@yahoo.com

- I'm fine with you reading theory or K's as long as it is well explained and defended.

- Truth > Tech

- Be respectful and remember that cross is not for arguing but rather to further understand each other's positions and discuss about evidence.

- Don't waste cross time to call for cards. Do that separately, and prep time will count towards you reading the cards.

- Don't read anything new in the second half. I will accept new weighing and frontlining in summary but not in Final Focus.

- I work in the finance and banking sector so I will understand economy-related arguments extremely well and will be more willing to vote off them

- BE PROFESSIONAL.

Decision

I give my ballot to the side that does the best impact comparisons and weighing, provides good quantitative statistics and logical evidence, and well constructs/explains their narrative.

Speaks

- I DO NOT TOLERATE RUDENESS/RACISM/SEXISM

• I give speaks based off of organization, clarity, participation, and ethics

cant talk gettin swole

Speak with clarity and conciseness.

During crossfire, make sure to answer questions directly and move at a quick pace. Do not get stuck on one point and repeat it over and over.

Rebuttal, make sure you are speaking to the opposing teams case and contentions.

Be respectful

I'll be looking for well-organized arguments that demonstrate the impact and significance of your points. I'll also be looking for direct responses to your opposing team's points. Good luck!

I judge primarily based on the flow. I would prefer if you did not use a framework. I don't mind if you use off-time roadmaps.

Please PLEASE weigh. Weighing is incredibly important, so remember to weigh!

Every argument should have evidence backing it up, and if you don't have evidence I am assuming that you are just using logic.

Also, make sure that you always ask a question during crossfire- I don't want one person getting every question.

I am a debater myself, so don't mind if you speak fast: just speak so I can understand you.

PLEASE be respectful to one another. I will take speaker points off if you are rude.

Overall, please just have a good time and have fun! I look forward to seeing you debate!

I am a parent judge with my two girls enrolled in debates.

- No spreading, speak loud and clear at a reasonable pace. If you speak too quickly, I may not get all of your arguments down and understand what you are saying. Quality of arguments/evidence over quantity.

- Respectful to each other and present yourself well. Do not talk over your opponent. Discourtesy will result in deducted speaker points.

- Always have a framework or prove that your case supports the opponent's framework better.

- Use credible evidence and logic to back up your claims and attack an opponent's case. Explain why your impacts matter more than your opponent's. Your rationale should be clear so that your opponent can adequately address your points. Don't just attack, you need to defend.

- Signpost your arguments/rebuttals

- Your summaries should be to clean up anything vague or muddled, and final focus to make me vote for you. Everything in the final focus must also be in the summary speech. If something isn't in summary, don't bring it up in the final focus.

- Please track your time. You may finish a thought after time ends, but do not abuse this by adding multiple sentences or thoughts when I call for time should end.

- I value the time and energy you have invested in debate and will make sure to be a thoughtful, attentive judge. Just debate and have fun.

- For the virtual tournaments, my decision is not influenced with the issue of technical difficulties debaters might have during the round. However, please try to resolve technical issues during the tech check before the round. My decision-making and comments are related only to the content and quality of the presentation or speech itself.

NSDA’s Online Tournament Guide

Hello, welcome to my paradigm! I debated PF for 4 years in high school in the National, TOC and State level. I also participated in a lot of speech events (extemp, impromptu, oratory).

Things I appreciate:

A. Current evidence along with an explanation of the argument in the debaters own words along with a crisp impact.

B. Good manners!

C. Turn on your camera on if it is an online tournament. Sit straight or stand up straight and make eye contact with the camera as you would if you were in person.

D. Roadmap before your speech (except for the first and last speeches)

E. Don’t forget to weigh your final arguments against your opponents in the final speech.

Things I don't appreciate

A. No counter plans. Not enough time in PF to debate that properly.

B. Have evidence available to provide to the other team quickly. Don’t explain it as you are handing it over. Have your partner give the evidence if you are about to speak.

C. Don’t be rude :)

Ask me during round if you have any questions

Well supported arguments that are presented clearly. Arguments should be addressed individually.

I am looking for rebuttals that extend arguments. I like civility, so please don't be offensive, rude and let your opponents finish their thought.

I give weight to impact and good citations. I also award points on how well you present your arguments

I also value the analysis. Use examples or states or qualified opinions and then give me your analysis of the evidence...why does your evidence matter...how does it fit into the topic.

Debate the resolution and make sure to carry through your arguments through till the end.

All aspects of CWAIL is important

Hi!
My name is Sofia Nabi & I’m a parent judge .

I have debated in my Elementary ,Middle , High School & College level . Am currently busy with family so have taken a break from my debating interest . I am a flow judge and base it on the flow of arguments, contents, and overall presentation of the debate. I prefer debaters to present their arguments and explain why their arguments should win. I don’t like excessive speed and prefer quality over quantity. I might miss points due to excessive speed, so please be clear and slow down. Also please time your own speech so I can be more focused on the content of the speakers.

Thank you.

I'm a flay judge that has debated for about a year. I've debated this topic and I know the common arguments fairly well, but you still need clear links for me to buy them. If you talk fast, talk very clearly. If I can't hear your points, I can't vote for you. I don't flow crossfire. However, if you are excessively rude during cross, I may give you lower speaker points.

Weigh in at least Final Focus, Frontline in second rebuttal, Collapse in the second half of the round, and extend your impacts.

I'm not a big fan of theory, so if you do it, do it well.

hi! i go to winston churchill high school (md) and i have 3 years of public forum experience.

.

general preferences + info:

-speed is ok but don't spread, please speak clearly

-tech > truth as long as the argument makes sense

-weighing is super important!! warrant and explain why your argument is more important than your opponent's

-frontline in second rebuttal

-warrant things clearly, unwarranted arguments don't mean much to me

-things in final focus should be brought up in summary

-don't be rude in cross

-please signpost!

.

feel free to contact me: catherinenan158936@gmail.com

andrew.w.pan@gmail.com

collapse

extend

weigh

run ks, theory, trix, whatever. i default to competing interps.

four-year PF debater from Millburn, mother of Jimmy Chen, unicorn pundit

way to win the round: clearly win an argument, clearly tell me why it's more important than what your opponents are winning

fun facts: I don't hold first summary speakers to the same standard as the second in terms of defense, but generally speaking if you want it to be in the ballot, it should be in the summary; I won't call evidence unless it's clearly disputed in round, if your opponent is miscutting, lmk to call it; I like super clear signposting and when you do the work for me; Absent a weighting mechanism, I'll default to the easiest path to the ballot; pls don't run Ks i'll get confused and have to ask Max for help during crossfire

be nice to your opponents and I'll be nice in speaks!!

let's have a good time

https://twitter.com/itsgirllcode/status/843164268107255808?lang=en

Hey, my name is Jason and I am currently a Freshman at RM High School. Feel free to email me at parksjasonp@gmail.com before or after the round if you have any questions, comments, or concerns! I often respond fairly quickly.

TL;DR:

- First year competing in debate

- Second time judging

- Sign post, use both logic and cards, extend, make clear links (don't assume), weigh

General Round Stuff:

- Tech > truth

- No spreading

- Don't run K's or Theories

- Speaking fast is fine

- Please use some form of rhetoric/logic and don't just spam quotes/cards.

- I will disclose and give feedback (assuming it is permitted)

- Speak confidently even if not completely sure what your saying. If you voice your arguments like you believe it, I will most likely believe it as well.

- I will try to flow and keep track of the round, but if there are any important parts of your case you want to be sure I know I encourage you to re-iterate important messages during Summary/Final Focus.

Crossfire:

- Be respectful and mindful when speaking

- Don't box your opponent(s) out let a fluent exchange of questions and responses

2nd Speeches:

- CARD IS NOT NEEDED FOR EVERY REBUTTAL - LOGIC THAT MAKES SENSE AND IS REASONABLE IS ENCOURAGED

Summary:

- Please weigh your argument. Much easier to decide on a winner if you are directly saying why your case (whether it be framework, sources, etc.) is stronger than that of your opponents.

- As a judge if I fail to follow a specific argument this is your opportunity to bring it back up to my attention.

Final Focus:

- If a framework debate is brought up, don't just explain your framework state why your framework is better than that of your opponents.

Good Luck!

hi im lily I’m a senior in highschool varsity debate.

I DONT HAVE A LOT OF BACKGROUND TOPIC KNOWLEDGE FOR THIS TOPIC- explain things that may not be common knowledge to me please

keep track of ur own time pls

write my ballot for me (aka tell me exactly why you win) in your final focus

you can run progressive arguments at your own risk i know how prog args and theory work but im super rusty. also dont run prog or theory if ur opponents arent familiar w those types of args.

pls do comparative weighing I’ll give you high speaks

second rebuttal should at least frontline offense

defense is sticky(first summary doesn’t have to extend defense ONLY if it wasn’t responded to. first final focus should bring it up again if u want me to vote on it tho)

speak as fast as you want but if I say clear slow down

everything in final focus must come from summary

pls collapse in summary

don’t be rude have fun

This will be my first time judging, so for those of you that are experienced--I suggest you take advantage of the fact that you probably know more about the art than myself.

I will be looking for factual information. If you cite a statistic, please be ready to provide evidence. (Example: One in twenty-three Americans eat french fries twice a week. If you make a statement this specific, you'll need to be ready and able to back it up.) On the flip side, if your opponent makes a common sense statement--please don't ask for evidence. (Example: The sky is blue. Now we all know the sky is sometimes grey and sometimes colorful in a sunset, but generally speaking...the sky is blue. Don't be so detail driven that you lose focus of your actual debate topic.)

Please stay calm, cool and collected. I won't be looking for the person who can scream out the most words in three minutes. I will be looking for the person that makes an impact in that time period.

From my research, I've been told that many participants want to know what political party in which a judge may be affiliated. I will answer that question here so there will be no need for you to wonder. I am a very socially liberal, independent-party voter with deep roots in the South.

With that being said, I signed my daughter up for debate because I wanted her to learn to argue both sides of an argument eloquently. For this reason, she prefers to take the Con side of a debate. She wants to practice presenting legitimate speaking points about topics she does not agree with.

Be assured that I will not be paying attention to which side or opinion you take when you debate. I will only be looking for how you present your topic. I encourage you to step outside of your comfort zone and practice defending a position in which you don't believe. In the end, I think that ability will benefit you when the time comes for you to speak to topics that spark passion.

Hello debators!

Quick Introduction:

My name is Shriya Reddy (I use she/her pronouns.) I am currently a sophomore at Centennial High School, and I am looking forward to judging your round! I have debated for about 3-4 years in Public Forum and I absolutely love doing it!

Speaking style and content

As for the content of your case, I would prefer that both teams have evident understanding of the ideas and contentions that they bring up in their rounds. I think that knowing the topic well is very useful and persuasive in a round.

I also prefer that you extend your arguments throughout the round, meaning that you know them well and do not loosen on the strength of them when you can. It makes you much more convincing, and stronger as a debater in my opinion.

I am fine with whatever speaking tempo that you are most comfortable with.

I do not like when people try to talk over one another in crossfire, or dominate the conversation, as it is rude, but also makes it both hard to hear and it unfair to the other team.

As for grand crossfire, I like when all debaters are participating and doing their best to defend their points and attack the opponents' points.

Weighing during the round is always appreciated! :)

Feel free to ask me any questions that you need to before the round begins and have fun!

Hi! My name is Shriya (she/her) and I'm a junior in high school with 2 years of public forum experience. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns before the round, email me at shriyasane@gmail.com. If you are starting an evidence chain at the beginning of the round, please include me in it.

Speeches:

- I'm pretty comfortable with speed, but just keep in mind that if I can't understand it clearly, it's not going on my flow

- Off-time roadmaps are good as long as you follow them

- I'll always time you, but I prefer you time yourself because the whole concept of unmuting, cutting you off, and saying "THAT'S TIME" is super uncomfortable to me. Basically just don't abuse the time restrictions

- Signposting is super helpful and encouraged

- Weighing is super important! Make sure your weighing is comparative and please start weighing in summary rather than ff. I'd like to hear you use actual weighing mechanisms like magnitude, probability, scope, etc.

Cross

- I'll definitely listen to cross, but won't be flowing it. If something extremely important happens that you want me to consider, bring it up in a speech

- In cross, there is a clear difference between assertion and aggression. Don't run over your opponents and just be courteous. In grand cross, I want to see everyone participating

Evidence:

- If a particular piece of evidence is super important to your case, bring it up multiple times throughout the round

- I'm fine with paraphrasing as long as it's believable and makes sense, but I prefer cut cards

- I don't flow author names, so don't bring up cards by saying the author tag. I prefer you remind me what the card said

K's/Theories/Progressive Args:

- I'm familiar with them but not super comfortable, so I can't promise you a favorable decisions if you decide to run one

Have fun and good luck!

Hi!

I'm a senior PF debater for Churchill. My pronouns are she/her.

- Tech > Truth

- I vote off the flow

How to win:

- Make sure to weigh and make it comparative. Please don't make me do this for you!

- Warrant and implicate your arguments. Tell me why something happens and why that matters

- Frontline in second rebuttal

- Extend & collapse!

Other things to keep in mind:

- Speed: I'm okay with speed, just don't spread. I would prefer that you go slower though.

- Online debate: CUT YOUR CARDS PLEASE!! Don't paste a link into the chat and say Ctrl F for x. Please start a card exchange doc/email chain at the beginning of round if the tournament allows.

- Please time your own prep and speeches

- Theory & Ks: I have limited experience with both so run at your own risk

- Read a content warning/send out an anonymous form if you're reading something on a sensitive topic

- Don't be racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc. (I will drop you)

- I will disclose my decision at the end of the round if the tournament allows

- Feel free to ask questions about my preferences before round!

Have fun and good luck! :)

My preferences for a good debate:

1. Clear and well-cited arguments

2. Respectful behavior towards the judge and your competitors.

3. Active engagement during Crossfire rounds.

Updated for Jul 2023 Potomac Summer Camp Debate Tournament

• Tech > truth. A bit rusty.
• Please weigh!
• Extend your arguments
• Frontline in second rebuttal i.e. respond to at least part of the previous rebuttal in the next speech
• Warrant and implicate your arguments
• Signpost i.e. tell me where you are, which argument you're talking about, etc.
• Ok with speed but just be clear. Articulation and signposting will affect my comprehension of the round more than speed
• At camp, so will make decisions based on pedagogy as wins and losses determine the direction of the activity
• Speaks: don't look for anything in particular but obviously will tank if people are obnoxious/condescending
• Prog: I usually flow it. I had very little experience with theory and particularly Ks/tricks, read at your own risk. I will drop what I believe is frivolous theory/theory against novices and give 26's.

If you have any other questions please ask!

Short Version:

Tech > Truth

Speed is fine

Collapse & extend, weigh, signpost

be nice B)

Debate/Topic History:

High School PF debater, 3 years of experience debating, judged 4 tourneys

I've researched and debated the NATO topic.

Speed:

Speed is fine but send a speech doc if ur gonna spread, if your opponents or I miss something bc ur spreading, that's on u

Rebuttal:

Quality > Quantity, don't dump 100 args, that's not gonna help u, 3 or 4 well explained args will help u a lot more

Warranting > Cards, preferably both, i'll be upset if all ur responses are uncarded but a well-explained analytical arg goes a lot further than u just reading a card and not explaining it to me.

2nd rebuttal has to frontline

Early weighing is always a bonus.

Summary:

COLLAPSE! If you try to win everything, ur gonna end up winning nothing. Just flesh out a few args to set up ur partner for ff.

W E I G H please. comparative or there's no point.

extend everything you want me to consider (no sticky defense).

no new args in 2nd summary

Final Focus:

just lay out the reasons why u win and weigh.

Speaks:

I'm gonna default 28.5 unless u really impress me or annoy me.

If you're reading all this, tell me ur favorite ice cream flavour before the round and i'll boost ur speaks bc it proves to me that u read my paradigm.

Other things:

Don't run theory/Ks pls & ty

Please try to actually convince me, i can tell if ur just reading off a doc and i won't rly be happy

Speak confidently, the more confident u r, the more convinced i'll be

Don't be problematic (no racism, sexism, homophobia etc.)

Be respectful and nice to each other :/

Being rude/laughing at your opponents = speaks tanked (roasting in cross is encouraged tho ;))

I won't flow cross unless something phenomenal happens.

I'll disclose and i'll probably have a lot of things to say so feel free to stay behind and ask questions.

Email me at vivekasinha3@gmail.com if you have any questions before or after the round.

Hello!

So glad to see everyone on campus this weekend!

I am a sophomore at Harvard competing primarily in APDA. I did a significant amount of PF in high school (Richard Montgomery HS) and won the tournament in 2022.

I'm ready to evaluate any arguments you'd like to run. That being said, please

1. Weigh
2. Warrant
3. Have high-quality evidence
4. Consider theory sparingly. I am relatively unfamiliar with evaluating these arguments at a technical level.

Most of all, take it easy. I hope that good argumentation and the best debates are exciting and fun for all involved.

Senior at Churchill.

add me to the email chain: benjaminstang@gmail.com

tech > truth

General:

1. DEBATE IS A GAME

2. I don't call for evidence unless someone tells me to

3. If it might be triggering or you're not sure, just read a TW...

4. Signpost.

5. Should frontline in second rebuttal cause defense is sticky

6. Extend anything you want me to evaluate through summary and final focus

7. Speed is key

8. You get one minute to pull up evidence. After that, I will not consider it unless you have a legitimate reason (ie. wifi is slow, they called for a lot of cards, etc.)

Progressive:

Only have a little experience running it myself but am fairly confident I can evaluate it properly.

Random stuff/tips

1. final focus should parallel summary

2. comparative weighing is always better than just saying "we outweigh on magnitude."

3. Cards must be cut.

I am Amit and Working as a Product Manager in the Washington DC area. . I am a parent judge.

Please do not spread. Speak clearly. Please try to focus on the contents.

Be respectful to your opponents. Points will be taken out if you show disrespect to your opponent.

Have fun and good luck!

Hello Everyone! My name is Phani and I am very excited to be your judge today!

I am relatively new to todays topic and I am lay judge.

In order to win my ballot, please do the following:

1) Speak Slowly and Clearly! I need to be able to understand your arguments clearly and you should also be as concise as possible when explaining them.

2) Remember that you are trying to convince me. Thus, I need you to tell me exactly why I should prefer your impacts/links over your opponents impacts/links.

3) Everyone should be respectful throughout the round!

If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask me during the round and remember to have fun!

About Me:

I have been debating for 5 years

I am a flow judge but if you speak too fast I will not be able to write down the arguments. I can process what you are saying at high speeds but remembering it long enough to write it down is difficult for me. Off time road maps and signposting are very useful to me.

My email is Dhira@aaryaveda.com for the email chain.

He/Him

Tech>Truth

Time your opponents and feel free to interrupt them gracefully when the time is up. Please let them finish there sentence though and don't cut them off rudely.

How I vote:

Please don't go for every argument on the flow unless you are sure you can win all of them. Collapsing on one thing makes it very easy for me to compare points in the round.

Extend arguments that you know you will go for fully through the round. I hate it when a debater just says "cross apply my first contention" with no analysis or says "extend my partners responses from rebuttal". If they are key responses PLEASE repeat them in your speeches. The only speech where I don't need responses heavily extended is in Final Focus because I know 2 minutes is not a lot of time and I would prefer it if you use that to analyze and weigh.

Please do comparative weighing in both summary and final focus. If you start in rebuttal that is fine to. Please don't assert your impact and call it weighing if you are gonna do that you might as well not weigh at all.

Speaks: I will try to give high speaks but will tank them if you are rude or offensive.

Evidence: I don't care to call cards myself unless there is a lot of clash on it but feel free to call and indict, I will flow and weigh it.

Theory: Try to avoid unless you know you can do it well. Personally I think if you are running theory and you are not in varsity you need to calm down.

At the end of the day. Debate is about having fun as long as we enjoy ourselves nobody should have a problem

Background

I am a flow judge. I am currently a junior at Richard Montgomery. I have debated PF debate for a little over two year. I have topic experience/background knowledge. I am aggressively tech over truth. I will not flow cross, unless summoned (hocus pocus judge please flow this). I will always buy solid and clear warranting over a card. I will disclose and give an rfd.

Contact Information

Email: alexander.y.wang@hotmail.com

Instagram and Snap: alexw1_jw

Discord: alexw1_jw#7692

Do:

• Use trigger warnings for triggering content

• Be kind and respectful. You will be dropped for being racist, sexist, homphobic etc. Cursing is ok in moderation.

• Speak at a reasonable pace. If you spread I need to see the speechdocs.

• Weigh. I will not weigh for you, and will default to your opponents mechanism, or to utilitarianism.

• Extend through summary AND final focus. Defense is sticky, but please extend at least a tagline in both speeches.

• Signpost

• Collapse in summary of ff. It makes things so much easier for me.

• Tell jokes, unless you’re not funny

• Offtime roadmaps. They are super helpful especially in summary.

• Have fun!

Don’t:

• Run theory or a K, unless there is a serious violation. Even then there is a good chance I will be voting off of substance. I do not like engaging in meta-debate

• Use words that are too big. My vocabulary is not the greatest

• Spread. Mainly for the sake of your opponents

• Frontline during 2nd summary. It’s just straight up abusive and will not be flowed

• Bring up new arguments in FF

• Abusively paraphrase. Please use good evidence ethics

• Run extremely squirrely arguments. The link chain has to make sense. Meme cases are ok though.

• Go over time. Please keep track of your own time.

Speaker Points

I default to 28.5, you will have to speak clearly and persuasively to get any higher. Please be respectful and kind to your opponents, especially in crossfire. Making ad hominem attacks will lose you speaker points. If you're funny or do like funny random stuff I'll probably give you more speaker points.

My son considers me a “lay judge”. I like logical arguments, but that doesn't mean it has to be a common argument (in fact, I like a variety of arguments because it spices up the debate).

For your debate, please do not “spread”; speak at a normal pace so I can understand. I listen to cross, but I do not vote what happens in cross unless you can’t defend case. Since I am listening to crossfire, it will play a role on how many speaks I will give you. I will give feedback and explain why I voted for a certain team after the round is finished. If I am judging an online debate tournament, I expect debaters to send me a speech doc for constructive AND rebuttal before you begin speaking to yang_wang1@hotmail.com because it helps me follow arguments easier. (use saved attachments or paste into the email content, NO google docs share please)

Time your opponents’ speeches and feel free to interrupt when time is up. Please stick to the allotted time frames. I prefer off time road maps and please stick to them. Please be respectful to your opponents at all times or I will deduct speaks. I take notes. Good luck.

I am a Ph.D in computer science, and I never attended an official debate, and judged an ES debate on Potomac Fall Championships. If you have solid supporting points, and strong reasoning logic, then you will have better chance to win.

For Omega!

DON'T BE MEAN. HAVE FUN AND BE NICE!!!

PLEASE weigh and implicate why your weighing is helping you win the round. (Ex. Don't just say, "we outweigh on scope". Explain why your team outweighing on scope is the most important thing to consider and what changes in your world whether we affirm or negate the resolution). If you don't weigh, I will not vote for you.

Second rebuttal should be frontlining. I don't think defense is sticky, just extend everything that you need for the upcoming speech.

Summary and Final Focus should be mirrors of each other. Don't extend new arguments in second final (plz :,))

WARRANT AND IMPLICATE your responses in rebuttal, summary, FF, etc.

I'm fine with speed, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna be able to follow everything you say and flow it. Also, I think that it could become inaccessible for your opponents as well. In the case that you need to speak fast, please send speech docs!

Speaks:

(+0.5-1): If you make a Taylor Swift reference. I will evaluate it based on your delivery :)

30 speaks if you make a DJ Khaled reference (specifically his most recent famous Instagram and Tiktok quotes)

If you say something offensive or make the round unsafe, you will get the L and as low as speaks go.

tl:dr; treat me like a flow/flay judge, do your best, and have fun!

Don't hesitate to ask me any questions before the round begins :)

Random things that would make me really happy if you do it:

1. Please weigh! Directly compare your impact to your opponent's and explain why it's better (a basic example would be "voting for the Affirmative means you save more lives than our opponents"). This will make me so happy!!

2. Keep the content in your summary speech and final focus consistent - they should almost mirror each other (no new arguments in final focus please). COLLAPSE on your arguments by summary - try and go for just one or two arguments to keep the round clean.

3. Warrant your arguments and responses! Make sure you explain every link of your argument to me. (Don't just say "global warming is bad vote for us"; Explain each step in your argument that would lead to a mitigation or prevention in global warming)

4. Use cross! While I don't flow it, it's a really great time to clarify your argument for me, and can affect how I vote in the round.

5. I'm really tired so if you want more detailed info you can look at this paradigm because I agree with it and it's well written:

https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?judge_person_id=51510

6. You can contact me @ wusijia@gmail.com if you have any questions later on

7. https://bit.ly/3bTPiUQ

Speaks - probably average around a 28, unless it's for a novice middle school tourney in which case I'll probably be averaging closer to 28.5-29.

Hi! Current junior pf debater. Good luck!

lindseywu05@gmail.com (email chains/card doc and speech docs)

Nocember:

sorry I have like no crypto knowledge so unless u define crypto-related jargon, use at ur own risk

General:

- tab ras

- signpost!!!!!!!!!!!! & roadmaps (if idk where u r I'm prob not gonna flow correctly sorry)

- COMPARATIVE weighing

- tech>truth

- speed is meh but if spreading (>250 wpm) I need a speech doc before speech

- generally would like cases sent to me so I can make sure I catch the numbers correctly

- idc if u collapse, the strategy is urs but there's a risk of under contextualizing/weaker narrative if u go for a ton of args

- 10 sec grace period

- pls don't be rude, this is debate I know you want to win, so if you do... don't be rude

- pls do not scream, I will dock ur speaks

- I DO NOT TOLERATE sexism/racism/homophobia/anything that compromises someone's safety etc.

- MUST READ A TRIGGER WARNING + GOOGLE FORM OPT-OUT OPTION

Speeches:

- second rebuttal should frontline turns at a minimum

- sticky defense <3 (I still want to hear some of the best pieces of defense tho)

- all offense u want me to evaluate should be in summary (offense should be mirrored in summary to ff)

- no new args/responses/analytics in ff

Theory:

- I evaluate all theory and I pretty much love theory EXCEPT any frivolous theory (i.e. 30 speaks)

Ks:

- uh idrk how to evaluate so yea no thx

How to get 30 speaks:

- if ur RLY good (ofc)

- if ur rly funny

lmk if u have any questions!

I am a parent lay judge. Please do not spread and please be nice to each other.

I did nat circuit PF from 2018-2022 but I am hard stuck -1 IQ so pls dumb stuff down!

I prefer 1st summary frontlines turns at minimum and 2nd summary address all voting issues

1 other peeve, I rlly prefer u email all the ev u plan to read in a speech before you do it to the other team (+ me if u want), separately "calling evidence" only should be done in a "so where does your evidence say xyz??" kind of clarification. Too much prep skewing going around. Or just disclose but if u disclosed u should have the stuff ready to pull up anyways

If u do the ev stuff + are nice to the other team I'll give u 30s. Thx :)

Not voting on tricks/friv

Other than that debate how you want to

Thanks homies

.

junzhix@upenn.edu

Email if you have any questions: askalanna@gmail.com

Hi, I'm Alanna. I'm a sophomore at RM and I've been debating for a couple years now. Please view this video (it's very short) as I think it really highlights some crucial aspects of debate I believe you should follow.

Other than that, please just be nice to each other and have fun. Good luck!

-Try not to read Theory or Ks

-Weigh in summary

-No new arguments in Final Focus

-Try your best to frontline in Second Rebuttal

-Don't spread

-Focus on fluency and flow coverage

-Engage in clash

-Don't flow thru ink

-Always collapse in summary

If you have any other questions about preferences, feel free to ask me before the round

Wrong tabroom account. Check the other one.

I did PF for 4 years in high school followed by 3 years of parliamentary debate in college. I will accept most things most theories and arguments as long as they are well warranted and respectful of all debaters.

If you cite the researcher Tom McGuire in the debate I'll give you a 30. (It better actually apply to the round)

General:

- Be nice to everyone, I especially don't like people being rude in crossfire. If you are rude, I will dock speaker points.

- I'm not that familiar with progressive arguments, so run them at your own risk!

- Tech>Truth, as long as it's within reason.

- I'll time speeches, but I trust opposing teams to keep track of each other's prep times spent. I won't interrupt a person if they're going over time, but you'll probably notice that I've stopped flowing.

- I won't listen to cross, so if you want me to consider an argument, it must be within a speech.

In round:

- Please signpost during your speeches. I'm fine with off-time roadmaps as well.

- Send a speech doc if you intend to spread.

- No new arguments in final focus please. I won't flow it so you're just wasting time by bringing in new arguments.

- Please do comparative weighing in summary and final focus. Let me know why I should vote for you over the opponent.

- Extend the arguments you feel you are winning. If you don't extend in summary and final focus, I will drop the arguments from my flow. If you want me to evaluate any argument in the backhalf of the round (turns, case, defense, etc) you must tell me the link chain and impact for whatever argument you want me to vote on; blippy extensions missing parts of the link chain or simply telling me to extend an author name is not enough.

- The second speaking team needs to frontline in their rebuttal.

- You don't need to frontline everything, but you must frontline what you're collapsing on. If you don't want to respond to the opponent's turns, just concede to a delink.

- Final focus should mirror summary.

If you have any questions about any of this, just ask me at the start of the round or email me at andrewyu03@gmail.com

Hey! I go to Winston Churchill HS and I've been debating for ~3 years

(pronouns are she/her)

General

- speed is fine as long as you speak clearly

- if you want me to vote off an argument make sure to extend it through all your speeches with warrants

- tech>truth but only to a reasonable extent

- frontline in 2nd rebuttal if you're the 2nd speaking team

- please WEIGH your arguments and extend impacts to your contentions

- off-time roadmaps are always helpful

- signpost! (tell me where you are on the flow)

- I don't flow cross but I might use it to evaluate speaks (except for grand cross because I think it's a waste of time)

Progressive Args

- I'll try my best to evaluate things like theory or k's but I might not understand them, so please explain them really well

- If it's obvious that you're running theory to be abusive, I'm going to drop you

- don't run dumb arguments because I'll probably be too busy laughing at you to flow

Speaks

- I will give everyone high speaks unless you make offensive remarks or you're being rude

- if you say something funny or make me laugh +1 speaks

Have fun !

Here's my email for any questions or email chains: allisonzhang311@gmail.com

Senior debater at Georgetown Day School

Please add me to the email chain(add both email please): hzhang24@gds.org, georgetowndaydebate@gmail.com

I’m primarily a kritikal debater on both sides, but I’ve run policy affs before and went for cps and das as well.

For HS novice: You should read a plan until you can give a coherent explanation of your alternative model of debate and its implications for the debate community.

In general:

• Tech vs. truth. A dropped argument is not automatically assumed as truth unless extended and explained. I will not vote on arguments that are incoherent, even if it is dropped.

• 2AR and 2NRs need to write the ballot for me. It should paint a picture of the round rather than line by line.

• Credible evidence is important, but it won’t matter unless you flash out the warrant and its implication for the round.

• I find it troublesome that debaters tend to hyper-tag their cards to make claims unsupported by the card itself. If your opponent is doing so, point that out, and it will reward you greatly.

CP: You need to have a NB and extend it in the block. For competition: I’m less familiar with the competition debate. I can keep up with textual and functional, but beyond that, i.e. positional, you need to explain it to me as if I'm new to debate.

DA: Do whatever you want; I can keep up with them. Do impact comparison.

Kritiks: I will likely be familiar with most of your K lit base, so read whatever you want. But do not expect me to do any work for you. You need to explain them thoroughly to me instead of throwing out jargon. I find links that are specific to the plan more compelling than the generic usfg bad ones, but I can be persuaded otherwise. Going for the k doesn’t mean you can neglect case. Dropped case often means the aff gets access to extinction o/w, which is risky for you even when your strategy is going for “you link, you lose.”

I'm a flay judge. Tech>Truth.

I go to school at Richard Montgomery. I currently debate pf in high school right now.

A few rules and notes that I have:

-Please policy spread your entire case. In fact, 1000 words is the bare limit on word count.

-Please send all cases and speech docs in the chat. Or I will be angry and ask for them. SMH NOBODY ACTUALLY DOES THIS THO PLEASE DO.

-If you dab, I might give you the W. I respect og moves.

-5 squirrelly contentions or more will earn you an automatic 29 for speaks.

- Cross is never flowed. So crossfire is pretty much useless if you don't highlight and extend some responses in other speeches.

-I love brightlines

- Please weigh and extend warrants and impacts. Defense is never sticky... Extend!

-I will usually give oral RFDS and I may disclose according to tournament rules.

-I love meme cases. I will give you high speaks if you do really well with it.

-If you don't run a Theory shell, I will be sad. Nothing like arguing about debate itself. Please be sure that you actually see a violation.

-Running my Santa Claus Counterplan will give you 30 speaks. GL finding it

-RUN A K, but make it funny

-Postrounding is dumb, don't do that. I will edit your ballot and give you 5 speaks.

-At the end of the day, all judges are tired. You are much better off having a brick as a judge when we get to outrounds.

-When you say talk abt de-links, make sure you show me a chain of paper clips and unhook them one by one (may be done between speeches but its better to do it in the speech).

-When you read turns, physically turn around.

-If you show me your pc and its a good one ill give you + .5 speaks. If you use a macbook, know that my respect for you has fallen greatly.

-if you do a tik-tok dance, you will hurt my brain (-2 speaks and -50 social credits).

***Also note: use your brain. If you call your opponent something offensive or if you shout expletives, you will be dropped.

****Also note: Some of the previous requirements may be circumvented if you tell me a few good jokes before round.

*****Also note: If you Rickroll the other team while evidence sharing I will give you thirty speaks.

My child has been in public forum for a couple years. I have some experience in judging public forum. I make my decision based on the contentions, evidences and logic. I don't put much weight on the delivery.

I would appreciate it if the students can speak clearly and not too fast.

Background: Flay Judge

I’m a relatively new high school debater (I’ve done debate for 2 years) with some knowledge on the resolution, but I have little experience judging.

Don't. Spread. I won't understand anything and then it all goes downhill from there...

Theory and K's are fine with me but please don't make it too complicated.

It's okay to go a little bit over time, I will still flow, but I will stop flowing once you go more than 30 seconds over.

Please make sure to be nice to each other! Being nice is really important, please don’t attack your opponents because that honestly just looks bad on your part.

I will disclose at the end of the round but specific feedback will be given in the ballot. If I don’t vote for your team please don’t take it personally either.

Have fun! :)