I have been the coach of Port of Los Angeles's team since 2018, and have judged approximately 50 rounds.

Preferences: Students should stand when they speak

Both partners should participate equally, including in cross examination

Please run your own time (and you may want to monitor your opponents' to keep them honest)

Give roadmaps and signpost within speeches

Clarify your impacts and provide a solid link chain

I am open to any kind of aff, but make sure you explain well why your plan or K-aff is better than the squo/necessary

I'm not really a technical judge. I will weigh multiple arguments, including framework and counterframework, but in the end I base my decision primarily on how convinced I was that your aff needs to happen to solve a problem, or that the aff is not useful or net harmful. Fairness questions will not often be the reason for my decision.

Ks and K-affs should be explained in simple language. I'm not that smart.

Don't be evil.

Email: sierramagallanes@gmail.com

Affiliations:

LAMDL (HTPA Debate): 2017 - 2020

CSULB: 2020 - Present

Hello! I'm new to judging online, so please be patient with me as I will be with you. Below are some things that I look for when judging and some of MY personal preferences:

- I like to see arguments extended.

- I like to see a person who knows what they are talking about (or at least sells me on the idea that they do know that they are talking about).

- Make sure that when you are debating you explain your arguments and try to make logical sense.

- I'm all for competitiveness, but I will NOT tolerate nastiness in the debate space.

- I love analytical arguments; reading just cards is boring.

- Judge Instruction (i.e. framework, role of ballet), remember that your job is to convince ME why you should win.

REMINDERS:

- I will keep track of time, but you are also free to do so as well

- tagteaming is fine (during cross-ex, not during partner's speech)

- Only spread if you enunciate and are clear (but please don't go SUPER fast, I can only flow what I catch)

- Quality > Quantity

- don't forget about the importance of analytical arguments

Hello my name is Llovizna Orantes, She /her

I have debated for three years now. I am in varsity now. Yes, I do allow tag teaming but please do not be disrespectful in anyway. Please sign post and before you start give your road map.

Ground rules:

1- be respectful

2-donot say anything hateful, or discriminatory

3- have fun

I vote on the best Case:

Inherency: State the issue

Advantages: Tell me the positive aspect to your plan

plan: Break down your plan and show me that you know it

K : If for some reason you and your partner decide to run a K make sure to explain it well.

At the end of day make the debate fun let's have some good clash.

Hi!

Lamdl alumni,

Debated for bravo medical magnet high school.

The first few years I ran mainly policy affs and negs, then my last year I ran a k aff on chicana feminism, and set col/cap ks on the neg.

Disclose as soon as possible pls.

Debate should be fun so run what you like (however any hurtful arguments will not be tolerated).

i think i hate spreading now?

recently debaters have been unflowable through the analytics/blocks/standards, make sure youre very clear because if I dont hear it I cant flow it

Be respectful, nice and have fun!

add me to the email chain please: pantojaasenat@gmail.com.

Policy affs

I ran policy affs my first few years of debate. Make sure you’re winning your solvency and preferably a framing argument as to why the aff is important within this space.

For the neg, case turns ! also solvency deficits.

Ks & k affs

I like them. This however doesn’t mean I know all about them so make sure you really explain your theory of power and really flesh out your links. If you want to win the alt, make sure everyone knows what your alt actually does. Specific aff links> generic links, 1 off K with a lot of substance are probably some of the best debates. In terms of framework make sure its clear why your interp should be preferred,

CP/DA

Make sure your CP is competitive with the aff and you have a good net benefit.

I get easily persuaded by good permutations, so make them and also don't drop them (both sides).

Make sure to explain that your disads ow the aff. impact calc! On the aff, link turns!

T/Theory

education>fairness. Make sure you’re contextualizing your impacts to the round and the space.

(ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:Hello, my name is Nahomy, my pronouns are she/her. I have debated in all 3 divisions in lamdl and I have debated in varsity 2020-2022. So debate how you want, but keep it within the topic and in connection with the topic. Most importantly... Have fun. Keep the nice vibes.Im a pretty chill Jude im cool with mostly everything. PLEASE KEEP your time I don't really like playing time keeper. PLEASE DO NOT ask me anything pertaining to debate while in the round ex: what you should run or what can be ran. Ask me these type of things before.

My Email: nahomy.rivas09@gmail.com please keep me in the email chain

If you say anything racist, homophobic, misogynistic, ableist, transphobic or xenophobic, I will vote for the other team and give you low speaker points. Please be nice to everyone in the room; this is a safe space for everyone.

I will also dock speaker points if you are disrespectful to the other team.

Time: I will keep time. Please also keep your time its really good to keep track of your time.

CX: open cross x

Here I go into detail on off cases, case, and how I vote but don't stress your self out don't overcomplicate debate just give me a nice constructive and speech on why I should vote for your side and not the other side use your evidence to back your points up. Be respectful keep it friendly with me and your opponents and were good.

Framework:

Big on framework if you run framework I expect to see a framework from both sides example if frame is ran on the aff side I expect a counter-frame from the neg ect. Also, I like to flow framework separately so make your frame explicitly clear!

Case:

Inherency: Tell me whats going on currently in the status quo and any issues going on

Advantages: explain the positive consequences that happen via your aff plan

Plan: Break down your plan in depth to give me all the good details about it

Solvency tell me how the AFF solves the issue via your plan this is very important

K:So if you choose to run K explain your ALT clearly please explain your link too. Explain why voting AFF is bad but also what voting for this K will look like and why its ultimately better than the AFF.

T: Voting issues ground and fairness I considered all of these when voting for the T.

CP: Why should I vote for the cp and how is it better than the aff plan you should tell me why I should vote for the cp than the plan

DA:How is the aff bad tell me all the harms and the how its linked to the affs plan explain your links and internal links impacts all the good stuff.Paint me a nice picture of all the bad things that happen when voting aff.Do an impact cal.

For the aff please answer the negs off cases do not leave something unanswered because then I have dropped arguments and that can led me to vote neg.This is For both sides dont drop your own arguments or your answers to your opponents arguments.

Ask me anything you want me to clear up before or after the round.

My basis are left at the door I will evaluate all the arguments how they were answered and handled during the round. Dont expect me to vote on something emotional if it dosent have anything to do with the topic at hand. and if you kick out of something I will stop considering it and say anything I should prioritize while making my decision.

Note: this is my first year involved in policy debate and have minimal knowledge on everything. If it helps, I majored in Feminist Studies and Politics. Please explain everything like you would to an incoming debater.

Top Level Things:

-include me on the email chain: steve.valenzuela1@lausd.net

-go at a significantly slower speed than usual

-i have more implicit bias towards K Affs in terms of the orientation towards the state. Although that's the case, that doesn't mean I admire arguments that say the state can be a progressive actor. I, however, do prioritize fairness and competition as an internal link to education, so Kaffs should have a good counter-interpretation that resolves procedural standards. Please still link all your offense back to arms sales and not just your ontology of the world writ-large when going up against neg arguments.

Argument Specifics:

-I go into the round highly skeptical of each side, i vote for the most logical arguments. Truth>Tech

Case

-nuclear war affs are hyperbolic, you'll probably lose to a security K

-soft left affs with credibility advantages are just not true and built on false premises, you'll probably lose to a K

-I prefer human rights affs

-these debate usually come down to logical arguments---claim, warrants, reasonings.

DA

-case turns are infinitely better than nuclear war impacts against soft left affs

-affs should have sufficient defense against each scenario for nuclear war

-please have an internal link explanation, I can't do the work for you

CP

-have net benefits

-perms are viable, don't know about the DA being resolved through them though, you should have defense

K

-nuclear war affs are scare tactics

-soft left affs with credibility advantages are not true

-please explain how the alternative resolves the links and how it gets implemented materially

-assume I don't know your material, explain everything like you would to someone that doesn't know debate at all

T

-t debates are boring

-unless your aff is ridiculously small, please don't run topicality

Theory

-please don't, I won't evaluate it