Parent judge with 5 years of experience judging PF and some LD, both in-person and online. I'm not quite a tech judge, but am getting closer. For PF debates:

• Clearly lay out your contentions and subpoints upfront, and refer back to them during the round when you're providing additional evidence or warrants. Extend in your final speeches.
• I don't need an off-time roadmap, but feel free to provide one if you think it's helpful. Your speech should be organized well enough that I can tell when you're talking about your case or your opponent's, without an upfront roadmap to guide me there.
• I don't flow crossfire unless something new jumps out that I'm looking for later. In the next speeches, be sure to extend anything from crossfire that you want me to consider. Otherwise, you've made the decision that it's not important for me to hear or consider.
• Weigh, or at least tell me what the impacts are of your argument. Without that, I'm left without much of a "why" upon which to judge the round.
• That said, impacts should be reasonable and realistic. If nuclear war and 7 billion deaths really are a likely impact of your argument, that's fine. But I might give equal weight to an argument that would lead to 100K deaths from a conventional war that is more likely to happen in your future-state or the status quo. Or one that would increase the deficit by 5%, if that's more likely to be the outcome. And I definitely won't give much weight to a nuclear war impact from something like organic farming, or Medicare for All -- again, be realistic.
• If you want to run theory, go for it, but remember you're trying to convince me (not a professor or college debater) that your argument is better than your opponent's. Most theory cases don't do a lot for me, so you have a higher bar to clear if you're going to go that route.
• This goes without saying, but be polite and respectful to each other, and have fun. Even if it gets testy during the round, please congratulate each other at the end and shake hands (or fist-bump). I know the competitive aspect of this is real and can get intense, but remember why you're here.

Lay judge

I am a parent judge. Please go slow and clear so I can understand what you're saying. Please don't use any discriminatory language.

Hello! I am a parent judge (lay). This is my 3rd year judging PF so I know the structure of a PF round well.

A couple of key things

1. Don’t spread. If you speak too fast, I won’t understand anything you say and you’ll likely lose the round. It will also affect your speaker points.

2. Don’t run theory, K’s, or progressive arguments. I don't know what those are (my son wrote this part) and I don’t know how to evaluate them and it just leads to a confusing round. You’ll also likely lose the round if you do :)

3. It’s okay to paraphrase evidence, but misconstruing it is unethical and not allowed.

4. Don’t run anything racist, homophobic, discriminatory, etc. This is a clear violation of PF rules and will lead to you losing the round and <25 speaker points. Additional consequences may follow.

5. Please time yourself for each speech. Please be honest with your prep time and be responsible for keeping your opponent’s prep time as well.

6. I will be listening in CX but if something important happens in CX, make sure to bring it up in later speeches.

In terms of the argument, make sure to walk me down through the entire argument and explain it in enough depth. I want well-warranted links and evidence. Don’t just say “X causes Y”, tell me why. If your argument doesn't make sense to me, it will be really hard for you to win.

In summary, collapse. Don’t go for everything. You’re better off explaining the 1 winning contention than explaining every single thing that happened in the round. Make sure to defend your case well.

In FF, you should be writing the ballot for me. Everything you said in Summary should be in FF. Tell me your voter points. Don’t bring up new arguments here and abuse 2nd FF. It’s not fair.

At the end of the day, debate should be a fun activity and debaters should enjoy it. I love clashes in the round but don’t be rude to your opponents. Be respectful in rounds to both your partner and your opponents. Enjoy!

Each team will be in charge of timing the round. I will not time.

I will flow; make sure you are providing links/warrants/impacts. If I'm not making eye contact it's because I'm making sure the flow enables me to be unbiased in my decision.

Speaker points will not only be based on how well you argue your case, but how you conduct yourself in terms of professionalism and the courtesy you show to your opponents.

less is more: spreading makes you look desperate. Hammer your key points and extend. I'm not a fan of the direct pleas or demands to the judge: ie "judge you must vote for us because of..."

I will always give feedback in my RFD so there is a clear understanding of the decision.

most of all: have fun! I admire all of you so much for your commitment to an extremely advanced and demanding extracurricular.

I am a parent of a Myers Park High School speech and debate student and have two seasons of experience judging Public Forum. I have also judged Lincoln-Douglas once. I am a retired accounting professional. I prefer for debaters to speak at a moderate pace rather than a very rapid one. I value argument over style. I will view overly aggressive debaters, and especially disrespectful ones, less favorably. I find weighing by debaters at the end to be very helpful. I provide some feedback in person at the end of debates but do not typically indicate which side won the debate, and in some cases I may need to go through my notes and do more thinking to determine who won. I do not consider any information not mentioned by the debaters in reaching my decisions.

This is my second year judging. I appreciate a logical, good-spirited, and respectful debate. Clear speech helps me follow the argument - I will not flow what I cannot understand so please avoid spreading. I favor quality of the debate over quantity of points made. Have fun!!

UNC '25

I am tech.

I understand prog.

send speech docs and cards to robertmg@ad.unc.edu

no CW/TW (for arguments that need it) means u get 25 speaks max

:)

TLDR: lay judge: go at a moderate speed, signpost, extend, weigh, and be respectful

Hey, I’m a PF debater, and I'm writing my dad's paradigm for him.

My dad is a lay judge, will take notes but I wouldn’t call it a flow. He will vote off what's extended (and weighed) in final focus. He appreciates a strong crossfire round but will not tolerate any rudeness. Will give 28 speaker points on average and will be higher if you deserve it.

General tips:

• Ask if everyone is ready before you start

• Read your contentions clearly, "Contention One is ____"

• Make your impacts really obvious, "The impact is __(lives, money, etc.)___" and be sure to quantify.

• PLEASE WEIGH! Tell him what you want him to weigh off of. The earlier weighing is introduced, the better! (For example, if your opponents dropped an argument, say so. This will make the decision much easier)

• Collapse in later speeches, giving you more time to better warrant your arguments (quality > quantity)

• Give a TW with an anonymous opt-out if ur gonna read stuff that needs one

• Give a strong rebuttal making sure to signpost the contentions you are responding to but make it more clear than "our case, their case"

• Second speaking team should ALWAYS frontline

• Do not use jargon (no "fiat", "delink", "non-unique", "offense/defense", etc.)

• Extend warranting on case and responses

Do NOT:

• NO SPREADING!

• Read framework, theory, and anything more than just pure substance

• Read a tech arg/impact

• Number/statistic dump

• Read offense if you finish early

• Do not abuse prep time!

I am a parent / lay judge. I try my best to flow with a flow tool I've used for the past 3 years I've been judging. I don't really understand theory and would really prefer if you not run it. I will review team balance (teamwork) and clock management for close matches. The pro should convince me that the resolution should be adopted, and the con should prove that the resolution should be rejected. Speakers must appeal to the widest possible audience through sound reasoning, succinct organization, credible evidence, and clear delivery.

This is my third year of Judging.

I judge PF and LD debates. I prefer you speak slower. If you speak too fast I won't keep track of what you say on my flow.

Being polite is important to me. Don't bring up new evidence during final focus.