I used to debate public forum for the Lovett School in Atlanta, GA. Did the whole state and national circuit thing blah blah blah. I'm in law school at Georgia State now. Please don't ask as I hate talking about work. Let's begin...

Crossfire is the most important part of a PF round. I don't know why other judges don't flow it. I will say that other judges not flowing harms the activity itself and harms you. For some reason, PF culture has evolved to where debaters don’t need to pay attention to the crossfire. The point is to allow impromptu questioning to gain concessions and provoke logical holes. Instead, I typically get a "can you restate/explain your argument" question which I deduct speaker points for. It’s one of the many skills you should learn from participating in this activity. It's my favorite part and I love a feisty crossfire. It's what makes debate, well debate. I find concessions in crossfire binding to the rest of the round even if it is not referenced by any side. Imagine debating on a public stage where someone makes a big oopsy. Do you think people listening will forget about a major concession? This means that should there be any uncertainty in my mind about an argument from a crossfire Q&A, you better believe you should address it ASAP. Therefore, be on your toes.

I do time you but I'll let you go over about 10 seconds before I cut you off. Please do not time each other. It comes off as standoff and rude every time.

I do not run prep time for evidence exchange and reading. The reason is because I have seen way too many kids ask for a card, become afraid of using valuable prep to scan evidence that has way too much information on it, then not use it because they really did not get to read it. I would rather we all stop, understand and appreciate the evidence, and have valuable discourse on it than stick with antiquated rules. This is a privilege which means that while the opponent is reading the evidence, no one can do any work during that time. If I see you writing something down during an evidence exchange, I will penalize the offending team. This rule does not apply to break rounds.

I also have no reservations on calling for a piece of evidence that I think is being used for "nefarious" purposes.

I debated and judge public forum (most of the time). PF to me is a persuasive debate meaning how can I use certain pieces of evidence to convince the general public that my side is the correct side. It’s also a way to create public discourse in an open atmosphere. That means I’m not gonna flow a 4-minute speech past 800 words because, in all likelihood, you’re speaking faster than what an average person can understand to retain your argument. Remember, the skills PF teaches is primarily public speaking to the average public. This is not Lincoln Douglas and it certainly is not policy.

Buzz Words that annoy me: weighing, dropped, flow, extend, card, impact, tech, truth etc. Literally anything you hear on the national circuit or on other judge paradigms will annoy me. At one tournament, I was told to turn different arguments for an entire 4 minute speech. I will throw up turning so many arguments. In all seriousness, please try to use words that are not technical in nature. Teams who typically cannot do so have attended way too many debate summer camps that do not prioritize accessibility. For example, I have no idea what it means to prefer tech over truth. I will allow you to use these words sparingly. Keep in mind the more you use it, the less speaker points I will give you.

I am a very different judge despite all my debate experience. I am terse, strict, and very specific on why PF is the most important activity. I am known to default to 25 speaker points as a starting base. I do not know why tournaments insist on starting at 28. That was not the case when I was debating and the range input is 25-30. You need to work your way up to a 30 not me subtracting points for bad debating.

I do however usually give out 30s during a tournament. I like recognizing good debating and I will give praises in round for skills I think are useful. I generally never agree with how other judges judge rounds which makes me an outlier. Whether you decide or not to change your strategy to me or keep it for every other judge out there makes zero difference to me. I have given many losses to nationally ranked teams and given wins to teams that would otherwise not get wins. I will always disclose and will give heavy feedback in round and also in tabroom. I will not answer questions after a round.

DO NOT ASK IF EVERYONE IS READY THEN GIVE AN OFF TIME ROADMAP. ALSO, NO OFFTIME ROADMAPS

I WILL ASK HOW MANY WORDS YOUR SPEECH IS. IT BETTER NOT BE OVER 800 WORDS. IF IT IS, THEN YOU DID NOT READ MY PARADIGM

DO NOT START CROSS AND THEN WASTE TIME BY ASKING IF YOU HAVE THE FIRST QUESTION. IF YOU GO FIRST, YOU GET FIRST QUESTION. THOSE ARE THE RULES.

SECOND SPEAKERS DO NOT GET A PASS FROM GRAND CROSS JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE ANOTHER SPEECH. I DEDUCT HEAVILY IF A TEAMMATE STAYS SILENT DURING GCF

PLEASE DO YOUR PREFLOWS BEFORE THE ROUND. I DO NOT WANT TO SIT THERE FOR 5 MINUTES WHILE YOU FLOW OUT YOUR CASE.

At Carrollton High School, I am a Varsity PF debater.

In general, I favor "tech over truth." If you tell me anything, I want proof and an explanation, but it ultimately boils down to your opponent's ability to reply. Please provide a signpost to keep me on track with your arguments.

Debate can become intense, but strive to maintain civility. My decision will suffer as a result.

Please provide trigger warnings for graphic material.

I don't flow CX, so if you think it's significant, bring that up in your rebuttal/summary.

To help you earn my vote, please make sure I flow the way you want me to: signpost, mirror summary/ff, and tell me how to weigh. If the affects aren't measured and a weighing system isn't provided, I'll have to rely on my personal prediction.

I am currently a freshmen at Georgia Tech (Go Yackets!) and debated VPF for three years in both the Georgia and National circuits.

If (it should be when) you are going to SHARE CASES or cards, set up the email chain before rounds start.

TIME yourselves, please. You need to be responsible for your own pacing and it will make the round flow smoother.

Do not take prolonged pauses getting ready for speeches (obvious exceptions are prep time and evidence sharing).

I am a TECH judge. If it's not on the flow I won't take it into consideration. Make your arguments and nuances explicit and tell me exactly what the evidence says. If it is bad evidence, it is up to your opponent to prove that to me.

Do not abuse EVIDENCE. Paraphrasing is fine, but if the evidence obviously doesn't say what you frame it as and the opposing team calls you out, I will call for it and more than likely a lot more of your contested evidence. When an opponent asks for evidence, I will give you a brief period to send it in the email chain.

I do flow CROSSFIRE out of interest but make sure to reiterate your points in speeches.

EXTEND For PF, if something is not in summary, don't put it in final focus. For LD, if something is not in rebuttal, don't put it in summary.

I'm fine with SPEED, but don't spit all over your laptop because you're going to fast to breathe. If it's too fast or I can't understand, I will say clear and flow what I can.

If you run THEORY, make sure it is not an abuse in and of itself.

Please SIGNPOST. Line-by-line is one of the most important things when winning my ballot. Honestly, I think that a really good debate revolves around rebuttal. If your responses aren't good or if you don't address all of your opponents' arguments, it gets really messy.

Clash is vital;

WEIGHING is really important. You should do the weighing for me as early as possible. If the weighing is left to me, it might not be considered in the way that you want it to be. As always, your main goal should be to make it the easiest ballot I've ever submitted.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to email me: andrew.herndon17@gmail.com .

Best of luck

Hi!

I am a pretty chill and laid back judge. I myself do PF, so I know most of the ins and outs of how a round should go. Below are a couple of answers to common questions and some things you should know before beginning your round.

• I am 100% tech over truth. If you don’t give me anything technical to go off of, I will vote where I believe the arguments were the most convincing.
• If you or your partner concede something, it will automatically go to the other team. Spending time on it will not help, so I recommend spending time elsewhere on the flow. Try to win other points.
• I do not have any issues with speed. If you plan to speak at a speed that isn’t normal for Public Forum, please start an email chain with myself and the other competitors on it in order to ensure we all understand what is going on.
• In order to make sure that I understand all of the arguments in full, I may stop the round to ask a quick question or two. Make sure you have a good explanation because if I don't understand your argument, how am I supposed to vote for it?
• I don't vote on solvency just name dropped. You need to prove how YOU solve as well.
• I will not tolerate being rude or overly aggressive towards your opponent. I understand cutting someone off because they have been talking for too long, but being plain rude is unnecessary and will be reflected in your speaker points.
• Please DO NOT bring race into a debate in an inappropriate way. If you attempt to use my race as an advantage to win the round, you will lose and receive the lowest amount of speaker points the tournament will allow.
• I love jokes during the round because it makes it a lot easier for me to watch. With that being said, any offensive jokes made will cost you and your partner the round. If you have to question whether or not the joke was offensive, DO NOT MAKE IT.
• Make clean extensions of your link story if you want me to vote on a certain point in the debate. Just extending an uncontested impact or an uncontested response will not help. Tell me the story behind the point and if you can give me the card info as well so that i may draw the line on my flow.
• PLEASE COLLAPSE. I AM BEGGING YOU. Collapsing makes the round better for literally everyone involved. If you try to go for everything and miss one key extension it could cost you the round and no one wants that. Soooooo collapse.
• I welcome questions after the round to try to clarify why you won or lost the round, but please do not attempt to change my mind about the decision I have made. I attempt to make the best possible decision based on the flow and the content of the cases. Trying to change my mind will just aggravate me. It is what it is.

Overall, just be kind to your opponents and the judge. If you have any questions, please ask them before the round starts. It never hurts to ask. Happy debating.

Im Will Roberson this is my third year judging/competing in PF

-100% tech>truth. I believe that debate is a game. I will vote on absolutely anything if it is extended well. Go for whatever you want to, but this means that every part of the argument has to be extended--including the link chain, warranting, specific evidence, and impact.

• consistent use of evidence pls

I am the PF captain at Midtown/Grady High School this year and am not competing.

In general, I prefer "tech over truth". If you tell me something I would like evidence presented and explained, but it ultimately comes down to your opponent's capacity to respond. Please signpost to keep me clear on your arguments.

Debate can get heated, but try to remain civil. It will affect your speaker points. Speaks will generally be 25-30 unless you are blatantly prejudiced.

Please give trigger warnings for graphic subjects.

I don't flow CX, bring up what happened in your rebuttal/summary if you believe it's relevant.

To help me earn my vote, ensure I flow the way you want me to: Signpost, mirror summary/ff, and tell me how I should weigh. If impacts aren't quantified and a weighing mechanism isn't given, I have to go off of my best assumption, which you don't want.

The most important thing to me in a round is that I want to see a genuine clash.

I won't vote off of nontopical arguments (abusive theory, Ks, CPs, etc.)

debated PF in high school local and nationally

if LD treat me like a lay judge

Hey guys! This is my third year competing in Public Forum debate at Sequoyah High School.

I can take some speed, but don’t sacrifice the clarity of your points just so that you can fit everything in. If I can’t understand something clearly, I can’t flow it. Be assertive and confident in your points, but expect to lose speaks if you say or do anything rude/offensive to myself or your opponent. This especially goes for crossfire, I won’t flow cross but it’s a good opportunity to clear things up and stump your opponent.

Try to start weighing in second rebuttal. In summary, extend your strongest standing points and try to start to collapse. If you are first summary, you should be frontlining. No new information should be brought up after summary. In final focus, I want to hear lots of weighing and tell me exactly why I should be voting for your standing voters.

Going line by line is easiest for me to flow all your points, but feel free to introduce an off time roadmap when necessary.

I really love hearing analytical and logical responses, but if y’all make an email chain for carded evidence, feel free to add ariannaycaza@gmail.com :)

To make this fun, follow me on Instagram and send me something funny for a speaks boost! @ariannaycaza

he/him/his

Hey, I'm Mark! This is my fourth year debating PF for Carrollton on both the Georgia and national circuits. I qualified to both the TOC and NSDA Nationals a few times, all in PF.

Please start an email chain before the round. Please put me in it: marzim@trojanstudent.net .

I almost always judge PF, but I have dabbled in LD and policy as well. The below preferences should apply to pretty much everything, but if you have any event-specific questions please ask before the round.

I never really know how to structure my preferences, so the below are my best attempts. Let me know if you have any questions either through email or in-person before the round.

_________________________________________

-100% tech>truth. I believe that debate is a game. I will vote on absolutely anything if it is extended well. Go for whatever you want to, but this means that every part of the argument has to be extended--including the link chain, warranting, specific evidence, and impact.

-Because you have to extend all parts of the argument, collapsing is often helpful. Collapse as early as you want.

-Go as fast as you want, but don't sacrifice clarity. I debate really quickly and can handle speed, just don't spread. If I can't understand, I will scream clear up to three times and then drop my pen.

-I don't flow cross.

-Time yourselves, please.

-I have a pretty solid threshold for theory, and have some competitive experience with it. If you run theory, ensure that it is not abusive. I don’t think that a formal counterinterp is necessary to respond to a shell, just give responses like you would a normal argument. If it's frivolous and the opposing team says that, I will drop you and play Tetris on my laptop.

-Paraphrasing is probably fine (definitely not preferred), but if you misconstrue evidence, I will hardcore drop your speaks. I might also drop you. When an opponent asks for evidence, I will give you about 1 minute to send it in the email chain (as a cut card) and then start docking speaks (this can be be altered at my discretion due to technology issues, etc.).

-PLEASE SIGNPOST. I also prefer line-by-line in rebuttal and summary, but this isn't necessarily a "must do to pick up my ballot" type of thing.

-Weighing is really important. You should do the weighing for me as early as possible. This said, weighing should not just be "we outweigh on magnitude/probability/scope/whatever other debate jargon you throw at me". Give me analyses as to why you're winning the round, and that should be adequate. If the weighing is left to me, it might not be considered in the way that you want it to be.

-Frontline in 2nd rebuttal or first summary. Nothing new should be read second summary and beyond.

-Be respectful in a round or I will tank your speaker points and drop you. Debate is a really important educational opportunity and I believe that learning is the sole reason that this activity exists. Disrespectful and discriminatory behavior kills this, so I believe that the punishment is warranted.

_________________________________________

I start speaker points at a 28, and then go up and down from there. I am usually pretty generous with speaks--I think that most judges are unconsciously discriminatory, so if you think you deserve super high speaks, tell me in a speech. I will listen. You shouldn't get below a 26 unless you did something discriminatory or extremely disrespectful.

Feel free to postround me, but make sure everything is submitted. I think that postrounding is educational for both the judge and the debater, and ensures that judges are checked for bad decisions.

If you make an "Office" or "Psych" joke and I think it's funny, I will boost your speaks by 0.2 :).

I disclose. Usually, I will give my RFD in round with a few main things posted on Tab.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to email me using the above email.