I did debate in high school and have tried just about everything though I mainly stuck to extemps, big questions and interps.

Speech: I want someone who can keep me engaged the whole time I am judging but also someone who has a clear knowledge of their subject. Organization is a big one for me so keep that in mind. In extemp a framework is preferable and at least 3 sources need to be used.

Debates: I like a clean cut round, if you spread I will not flow, my RFD's often come down to who has the most contentions standing rather than who had the better debate, however that is still a factor. Voters are huge for me, be confident in that speech.

she/her

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

I've been involved in speech and debate since middle school (nerdy right?) and briefly competed for the University of Utah. Most of my experience is in IEs, but I have debated in World Schools (HS), BQ (HS), British Parliamentary, NFA-LD, IPDA and NPDA.

DEBATE:

For all debate events, I do not mind spreading as long as your opponent is able to understand you. If your opponent can't understand you and they made that clear to you (i.e., you were "cleared" or "slowed") but you ignored them... that will definitely be reflected on your ballot in one way or another.

Add me to the email chain: merrinmaughan@gmail.com

• PF: To be honest, PF is the event I have the least knowledge about. Impact calc/weighing is something to keep in mind for your final focus speeches- in fact, it's probably what I will consider first when casting my ballot. Show me why your team should win the debate or the consequences if you don't. You can extend the constructive into the first rebuttal, but you do not have to. All other feedback will be specific to the round.
• LD: If you run a K or any form of theory argument, it's totally fine with me. However, if you’re running a K and you cannot explain in lay vocab or it’s obvious to me you’re trying to exclude your opponent from the round with some esoteric argument… it’s unlikely you’ll win. Next, I know there's a lot of discourse on progressive vs. traditional LD, and with regard to my judging, I will vote for the debater who convinces me why they win. Voters are key, and along with impacts, they are what I will consider first when making a decision. Offense and rebuttals (telling me why you win the debate) are preferable to defense (why you're not losing).
• CX: I will totally vote on T if you run it properly and collapse to it. I don't mind Ks, but if you are running a K, please make sure you understand it and link it well to the resolution. A good rule to follow: if you can't explain it in lay terms, don't run it. I don't have any preferences for CPs or anything. I don't mind if you run something unique, ironic, gamey, etc. as long as you can link it well to the rez! :P I'm also always up for just straight up debate. Most importantly, be courteous and kind to your opponents.
• BQ: BQ is so fun, and it's also unique to the other debate events. It definitely calls for a higher level of respect- so when touchy topics come up (as they will), please treat your opponent(s) with kindness.

TDLR:Run anything you want (within reason lol), as long as you're being kind and respectful to your opponent. Speed is fine with me. Impacts are super important.

IE/SPEECH:

Some general things to consider... First, do not rely on the grace period. I was a high school speech kid, and I would do the sneaky thing and write my speeches right up to 10 minutes knowing I could usually get away with 10:05 or something... But, that 30 seconds is there to save you in the event you have a memory lapse, get interrupted by kids in the hall, etc. Don't rely on it to hit 10 minutes: practice makes perfect. Second... being memorized (in OO, info, interps) is always preferable to being unmemorized or partially memorized. Finally, as a general note, I will gladly give time signals and I will definitely offer them before each round, but I am not the best at them... I'm usually too engrossed in your speech!

Event-specifics:

• OO: As well as a strong presentation, I look for logically sound arguments (i.e., does your solution make sense for the problem you are trying to solve, are the causes/effects you present supported by real-world examples and evidence, etc.). In terms of presentation, I'll be looking for the use of a good speaker's triangle, hand gestures, and good eye contact. Importantly, present to the group, not just to me. This shows that you're gaining the skill, not just trying to win the round. Make sure you are verbally citing your sources- this becomes very important at the national and university levels!
• Info: Your VAs, if you are using them, should complement your speech, not inhibit it. Your implications should be realistic and make logical sense with the other two main points of your speech.
• Extemp: Stick to the 3-point structure, and if you deviate, justify it. Please be verbally citing your sources and not just providing examples/information from prep time. Fill your time as best you can without going under/over and relying on the grace period, as discussed above.
• Interps: I have the least experience with interps, but am aware of the regular rules for blocking and cutting, especially for duo. Just be mindful of those, and I'll base any other feedback off of your actual performance.
• POI/Poetry/Prose: Your gestures are just as important as your content, so move purposefully according to your topic/text. Incorporate the book where possible, and have fun being creative with it! Use drama/emotion purposefully and sparingly.

Etiquette:

Timing: Please time yourselves. I will also keep my own timer running but I would prefer to focus on your words rather than the time. Depending on the event, I will cut you off right after the grace period.

Camera: Please turn on your camera. I completely fine with your camera being off during prep time or before the round starts, but once your time starts, turn on your camera. Additionally, notify me if you have any tech issues, I'll try to adjust things to make your experience better.

I prefer that you stand up for your speeches. I understand that some of you can't, which is completely fine--just notify me of your issues.

For Speech:

Extemp:

I vote on the clarity of a speech. Please be transparent about your position, topic, and contentions. You can accomplish this by 1. Signposting (physically or verbally), clearly stating your position, points 1, 2, and 3. Enunciate your words and make sure that there is variety in your tone and speed, it will indicate what I need to focus on. Hand gestures are nice, but not necessary.

Please use sources, state them clearly and tell me how they tie into your speech. I don't completely judge off of sources but please give me real facts. Running off of one or two sources isn't enough. Throughout the speech, make sure you're clearly linking back to the question. If it's a why question, make sure you're telling me why.

Obviously, answer the question. Don't dance around both sides of the argument, state your position and stick with it. Tell me clearly what your conclusion is with the evidence you have.

Oratory/Info:

Organize your speech. I will focus on the information and body of your speech. I will be looking for the establishment of a clear problem (harms) and how that is plaguing us/society (inherency), and then I will be looking for a solution of some sort to address this problem (solvency). There must be some combination of these three in your speech. I will also be looking for evidence, analysis, and a strong synthesis between the two. Good speeches will have solid harms AND will explain how the solution solves their harms. Delivery should be natural, not canned or forced and facial expressions should not be over-exaggerated. Please go over why I should care.

For Debate:

I'm open to most arguments and will vote on anything that is clearly extended, warranted, and impacted out. However, there are some caveats, which will be listed below.

First, I have rarely voted on kritiks. I don't necessarily hate the argument, but I just haven't found it persuasively articulated in a way that would make me reject the aff. Policy making framework and the perm are pretty persuasive arguments for me. However, do your thing, and if kritiks are your thing, go for it, just make sure to explain and impact it out very thoroughly and specifically.

Additionally, I flow on paper. This means that I probably can't keep up with you if you go insanely fast. Sorry, but it is what it is. Figured I should just tell you that so you're not disappointed. I'm not saying go slow, but just be careful.

I generally default to a policymaking paradigm, meaning offense needs to be presented to win the round. There have been exceptions, and I have voted on case defense when a 100% solvency deficit exists, but that is rare. I can be persuaded to change this outlook, but an argument for why I should vote neg on presumption when the neg wins case defense should be presented.

Disadvantages are good, expected, and encouraged. The links and internal links are generally the weakest part of a disad, so the aff should exploit this, through either evidence or analysis.

Counterplans are a very strategic option in front of me on the neg. On the aff, make sure that you impact out your perm and how it would function - "perm do both" means nothing to me if that's all you say. If the neg wins that the CP solves case, any risk of a DA means I go neg, so make sure that you have a solvency deficit to the CP and/or offense on the NB if you're aff. I'll evaluate CP theory how it's presented and don't really have strong leanings on most theoretical issues.

Case - Solvency is generally the weakest part of any affirmative - make sure you exploit this on the neg. Offense on solvency is good too. I have no problem at all with the neg reading disads on case and calling them solvency turns.

Topicality - I generally default to competing interpretations but could be convinced otherwise. I love a good T debate. Make sure to go a bit slower on T than other arguments, as it's more difficult to flow.

Please signpost every one of your arguments. Make sure I know what you're talking about.

BE RESPECTFUL, YOU WILL LOSE IF YOU DON'T DO SO.

Brief Introduction:

I have four years of experience in debate in Extemporaneous Speaking, Impromptu, Interp Events, Public Forum, Policy Debate, and Lincoln-Douglas Debate.

KEEP TRACK OF YOUR OWN TIME. I WILL KEEP TIME ON MY END, BUT RELYING ON A JUDGE FOR TIME ISN'T ALWAYS THE BEST IDEA.

Debate Paradigm:

While I have experience in debate, my experience is very limited, so while I will do my best to keep up despite my very advanced age and limited experience.

As a result of my lack of experience, I want to make some things clear of what I am not a fan of.

1. I am not a fan of Progressive LD. Don't pull it on me. While it may be in a gray area, let me put it kindly, if I wanted to judge Policy, I would've signed up for that instead.

2. Spewing. I know there's a lot of case material that many of you have to work through, but don't spew where it doesn't belong(LD and PF being the biggest cases). In Policy, I can try to keep track of that, but keep it more moderate. I don't want to hear 500 wpm, maybe 300 is the highest I can go.

3. Don't use Kritiks.

4. Don't perm.

Things to do:

1. Know your cases inside and out. It's painful to sit through CX and the most you can ask each other is, "What is your first/second/third point?" Know your strengths and your weaknesses.

2. Keep track of your prep time. While I will keep track on my end, having your own clock can save us some troubles.

3. Please wear masks while you are not speaking. While you can express your political beliefs all you want outside of a round, running the risk of the big Omicron's next outbreak is something I don't think would make good publicity for any debate tournaments.

4. Be loud, be clear. I'll do my best to listen, but I'll make it clear if you need to flex your vocal chords a bit more.

5. I encourage off-time roadmaps, generally this makes judging less of a pain.

6. Be respectful to the other team. I know how it feels to lose because of temper, and I don't want it to happen to anyone. At the end of the day, you're arguing topics for clout points, not fighting over Ukrainian soil.

Speech Paradigm:

Things I look for in a good speech can be organized in a few categories: body language, and topic engagement.

In body language:

Show strength and resoluteness. That means not standing up there giving yourself a hug or doing some potty dance of some sort. Project to the audience your belief in your own abilities.

Whenever you use hand gestures, remember to keep it in moderation. When you use hand gestures, don't use it with every word you say, use your hands when you need them. While it feels awkward to keep your hands at your sides, when you use your hands with every word, it loses its power.

Keep in mind, eye contact is key to maintaining a good speech. If you let your eyes wander, it makes me think that you're being distracted by something in the background, making me wonder what it is. It makes me think that you aren't completely dedicated to your topic, and that makes me feel less interested in your speech.

In topic engagement:

The first thing to keep in mind, listening to a monotone speech is boring. Try to have some human in your speech, try to evoke emotions from your audience, but again stay in moderation. Too much emotion dulls the emotions you want the audience to draw in your speech.

While it does blend with what I said, try to sound passionate. Sure, talking about COVID, the economy, Myanmar, or Israel might not be exciting, but try to incorporate ideas or things you're passionate in, that way, at least you'll be an interesting speaker.

Finally, remember, confidence is KEY! When you can sound like you know your topic, regardless of whether you do or don't, you give a good speech. When you don't, stammering, and stuttering, trying to make your way up to that time limit, you'll lose me less than a minute into your speech.

As a judge, I look for a well-organized speech with 3 or more distinct points. I would like your speech to flow together well with little to no stuttering, stopping, or use of filler words (Um, uh, like, etc.) I also want you to have facial expressions and emotion in your voice. In a debate round, I look for organization as well as respect for your opponent. Please stay away from personal attacks, and instead focus on the resolution at hand. For online tournaments, I cannot see your movement, so I want to be able to sense your passion through your voice and face. Please be kind and respectful to your opponents and anyone else in the room, and have fun!