Hi! I'm a college freshman currently competing in BP/ APDA, and championed WSDC with Team USA in 2023. I also have some background in PF and LD. Event-specific stuff below, but I don't think I have any particularly hot takes, so TLDR: have fun, be respectful, I will be as fair as possible, and I'm excited to watch you debate!

Please feel free to get in touch at ob1633@princeton.edu for additional feedback or questions!

WSD:

Assume when making your arguments that I have average human intuitions and a very basic understanding of how the world works. If you are going to challenge these intuitions or understandings, you need to do extra work when warranting.

• You don't need a 3rd sub if you don't want one. Sometimes they help; sometimes they're a waste of time; it's your call.
• Framing/ characterization is important: by the time your first speech is over, I should have a clear vision of what your world looks like.
• POIs: take at least 1 per speech. Give them so your opponents can also do this.
• I won't do any weighing for you: if you have a clearly better argument but do not tell me why it is better, I don't have any reason to weigh it above your opponent's material.
• If you say something that I happen to know isn't true, but the average reasonable voter likely wouldn't have the same knowledge, I will assume your argument is true until it is successfully refuted. Very unsubstantiated and obviously untrue claims don't require refutation.
• I am flowing and I will not vote for new arguments in reply, so don't worry if you hear them from the other side. I do listen to replies though, and they do matter to my call if you are able to introduce or extend particularly good weighing claims.

LD:

Tech > truth: This means that I will generally accept whatever is not responded to as true. Going into the debate, though, I don't automatically default aff or neg: warrant out presumption just like any other argument. I don't think that neg needs to provide a counter-advocacy of any kind if they can prove a material harm to the aff. Please include me on any email chains, but I would much prefer to listen to your speeches than read them -- I can flow spreading if it's clear. For prefs:

• 1: Trad, LARP, phil, topicality
• 2-3: Kritiks: I was not a k debater in high school. I would not consider myself an expert on k debate. I do enjoy it and think I can evaluate it reasonably well. Do what you will with that.
• 4: Tricks: To be so honest, I don't understand these. If you're running them please spell out for me exactly what you are doing and why I should vote for you. (This also applies to particularly weird theory args, ie, switch-sides debate)
• On disclosure theory: I am very unlikely to penalize people for not disclosing: people who don't know how to respond to disclosure theory are likely also people who don't know how to disclose. It makes debate less accessible and I won't drop you for running it, but I will pretend it never happened for the sake of the round.
• Generally: You can feel free to run whatever arguments you like (assuming they're not racist/ sexist/ deeply discriminatory in some other way). Just warrant and impact whatever you're running

Fluent speaking, smart argumentation. Make the debate make sense for me keep it simple.

I'm a pretty traditional judge with an extensive background in LD, PF, and Extemp, on both the National Circuit and the local level. I've competed at both NCFL Grand-Nationals and at the NSDA National tournament, and reached late out-rounds in LD and Extemp, so just know that I'll be familiar with most things you throw at me, but that doesn't give you an excuse to breeze past clear explanations of your contentions, counterplans, kritiks, or theory. No tricks or blips.

Honestly prefer that you not spread, but I can generally follow if you email me the docs: my email's tristanmay44@gmail.com

If you say you're not going to spread, I won't ask for the doc, but I also won't yell clear for you; speak as quickly as you think a reasonable person will be able to flow.

Make sure to focus on matching your warranting with your evidence convincingly; I don't care if you have a card stating something unless you can actually explain why it's true and the reasoning behind it.

Hi everyone! I'm a high school junior who's debated a bit at the national circuit in LD. I'm pretty traditional, but I'm willing to listen to progressive and off-case arguments. Just make sure to explain them clearly (don't assume I know the literature) and make sure to tell me how to weigh the round if you're running off-case arguments. I'll vote off the flow, so make sure your arguments have impacts that you weigh against your opponent's. I love when debaters give me voting issues at the end of the round.

I'm not a big fan of spreading but I'm fine with you talking fast as long as you're clear. I hope everyone has a good time in round and takes advantage of this great educational opportunity!

I’m Charlie, I’m a freshman in college. In high school I debated most competitively in World Schools and LD but did plenty of random events once or twice.

Generally, I care a lot about rounds being reflective of you as debaters. Show up with your best self. I don’t care how you’re dressed or if I personally don’t like everything you’re saying, I care that you’re engaging. Engage with me, your opponent(s), your evidence, theirs, and do it best you’re able! I promise I will be as fair as I can as long as rounds feel comfortable to everyone and we try to make it a good experience. ALWAYS!!!! Ask me questions. Email me if you want, ask after round if there’s time, whatever!

PF: Make this interesting, be nice. I did PF a long time ago but I still know how things work and I enjoy the event a lot.

LD: I love LD. I’m actually very open to whatever as long as you are respectful. I want to be fair, see arguments interacting, and most of all I just really enjoy watching debate so relax and do what you’re best at, even if you didn’t pref me. Do not stress!

Speed: I’ll say clear but do what you want to do. I flow quickly but if I’m lost I’ll do my best to be like ???? if you’re spreading I do 100% need to see your case though so email chain! It is a must. charliereeves202@gmail.com

Tech > truth: I mean, mostly, right? This isn’t overly complicated. If you don’t make something clear to me, if you don’t make flowing easy, if you don’t write my ballot in your last speech, I don’t know that you won. I generally think that it works best for all of us if I don’t intervene, but I will be clear that this is limited by a couple of things: first is being hostile. Second is arguments that I just don’t like lol (see tricks & friv theory)

Okay, pref me…

1) LARP!!!!!!!! Trad, K, Phil (I did them I like them I’m confident in my evaluations here)

2-3) Topicality, theory (I’ll understand it if you do it well but generally these weird me out)

>4) Tricks, friv theory, disclosure theory (???? Not for me. If you get me and this is your thing, don’t panic. Maybe you run it really well? Just be confident. But generally not a huge fan of these and they seem to sort of detract from debate as a community and as an enjoyable activity)