tldr; I love to vote off some nice impact weighing (for any type of argument) and I'm comfortable voting for most arguments (including Ks and debate theory stuff).

Email: bernie.azar@gmail.com

they/them

Oakland Catholic High School '21

University of Montana '25 (not debating)

My Experience: I was mostly a policy debater in high school, but I did a fair amount of PF and a little LD (more helping teammates with research than actually competing with it).

General Preferences

Feel free and encouraged to ask me any questions you have about my paradigm or how the round will work.

Please sign post, if I need to flow on multiple pages tell me at the beginning of your constructive speeches how many sheets to have ready, tell me the order of your arguments before you start your speech so I can sort my papers, throughout your speech tell me when to move to the next sheet of my flow.

Be nice, I understand being a little petty sometimes, but don't be mean.

Respect your opponents (and your partner!). Use their correct pronouns and such (we all make little mistakes, I understand that, but it's usually obvious when it isn't an accident).

Don't run progressive arguments on traditional circuits, its just rude and makes debate boring and unfair.

I will easily vote you down and report you to tab if you're being explicitly bigoted or purposefully disrespectful.

Have fun! Winning is cool and all but even cooler is having fun!

Traditional Advantages & Disadvantages

Don't spread like 10 advantages or disadvantages just to throw 7 of them out by your second speech. Every argument you run should theoretically be able to make it to the 2AR/2NR. Debate is an educational thing, don't write crappy arguments just to waste time. ALWAYS impact out your advantages/disadvantages args or responses.

Counterplans

I love them, be careful you're not just running plan plus because I get behind a good permutation argument. Also I'd advise against more than 2 maybe 3 CPs because I get behind a good conditionality argument. ALWAYS impact out your counterplan args or responses.

Kritiks

Don't run a Kritik against a team that has clearly barely heard of them, its just rude, follow the rule of cool here. I understand the basics of the popular kritks (especially setcol, anthro, & queer Ks), but I do need explanations here. I didn't run Ks when I debated so I wouldn't say I'm a "K judge" but I don't discount them. I understand the underlying theory most of the time, but you'll need to make the connection to the debate. ALWAYS impact out your K args or responses.

Topicality

I love it so much! Topicality is a small school's best weapon in my opinion. I do love a sneaky aff case, but do still be reasonably topical. ALWAYS impact out your T args or responses.

Cross-Ex

I do not flow cross ex, anything that happens in a cross ex must be referenced in a speech for it to be on my flow.

I'm chill with open cross ex, just don't speak during your opponents' speeches and keep speaking during your partner's speeches limited to a few words if they get tripped up.

Let your opponents ask questions, if they repeatedly aren't giving you the chance, feel free to interrupt them and ask your questions.

Style

If you're spreading so fast you're doing the weird breath thing, slow down. It's boring for debate to be just incoherent yelling.

Otherwise, I don't care very much about your delivery. If its great, I'll appreciate it, if it's less than stellar, I just won't really consider it.

Email: bloayza2019@gmail.com

Experience: 3 years of high school debate for DMHS in LAMDL, now doing my 4th year of college debate at CSUF

I ain't asking for much, just don't be racist, hateful, sexist, homophobic, ableist, and basically, anything that might make a competitor uncomfortable or might make ME uncomfortable.

I'm comfortable with spreading but if you spread through crucial arguments I may not catch it at times so if you want me to flow your most important arguments then slow down a bit. In the realm of online debate sometimes I might not catch arguments if they're not given in conversational speed.

IF you are reading this as an LD debater you will get more info reading the policy page to get a better idea

==LD==

Don't run tricks in front of me. I will not get them, which means I won't vote on them. This also goes for theory debates theory has to be very good at explaining violations and why this is a voting issue or else leave me out of it.

Nebel T isn't a real argument, I do not care who Nebel is.

I probably won't vote on Reverse Voting Issues, they don't make a lot of sense to me as a policy debater (but can possibly be persuaded)

==Policy Debate==

Framing: Framing arguments are a very easy way for me to vote for you, I find it something easy to vote on when teams tell me how I should evaluate the round and why evaluating the round that way is good. This also means that having the role of the ballot/judge argument would be very effective in persuading my decision but these arguments need warrants to them.

K: I'm comfortable judging K's. I'm very comfortable with set col literature and I am familiar with afropess, ableism, and cap literature. Don't worry if I'm not familiar with your K literature all I ask for is a more thorough explanation of your literature and your theory of power. In order to win the K for me, you need to have a link, and if the link is vaguely explained/generic then I really won't buy that you link. If you do link what does that mean and why is that an indictment of the aff (what's the impact).

Kaffs: I'm cool with people running Kaffs and I won't immediately vote them down but I do have to require a good explanation of the aff.

DA: you can win a DA by itself if you have impact framing and how that impact outweighs the affs impacts and part of that impact framing you need to win uniqueness. You also need to win a link on how the aff causes the impacts of the DA. DA must have all its parts in order for me to evaluate it, it must have uniqueness, a link, an internal link, and more importantly an impact.

CP: I also vote for CPs with or without a DA, the DA in my mind is not necessary for a CP but that means proving the competitiveness of the CP and why the CP is preferable over that aff and that means why it solves better for the impacts of the aff or if you're running this with a DA why the CP solves and doesn't link to the DA.

T/FW: In order for me to vote for T you need to win a few questions, why you're model of debate is good, you also need to win how they violate and why that's bad for the round. You need to extend your standards/reasons to prefer your model of debate over theirs.

Hello, My name is Malcolm Meyn, if you're reading this I'm probably judging you in novice or JV congress!

A little bit about me: I am a senior at East Chapel Hill High School and I have been debating congress almost exclusively for four years. I am a strong believer that debate should be a fun activity first and foremost. I really want everyone to feel comfortable in round and have an enjoyable time. I know this can be challenging in congress where most of the time is spent listening and flowing, but if there is anything that I can ever do to make a round better, please do not hesitate to let me know.

In round, especially in novice rounds, I really like to see spirited, passionate, and skilled clash. This is congressional debate, and I put a high priority on debate. My biggest emphasis on style is speaking in a way where I can hear you and clearly understand your arguments. Style is always good but it should not come at the expense of substance.

In novice rounds, I give big props to anyone who wants to PO. POing is a difficult task, especially the first time, and so a skilled PO who moves through the chamber efficiently will be ranked highly. POing is a very different skill and a hard one to rank against speakers, so rankings may vary depending on the quality of the rest of the chamber. However, any PO is better than no PO.

Be prepared. A lot of congress is just the ability to get up and give a well rehearsed, well prepped, and well researched speech that contributes effectively to the debate round and clashes well. This means that we set a docket and we have a balanced debate without multiple speakers in a row or taking frequent recesses to prep. Congress is a lot of work, but being well prepared goes a long way. Rehash will quickly lose you points and a speech that does not interact with the rest of the round, even if it introduces new topics, is not much better. This doesn't quite hold up for authorship/sponsorship speeches but you still need to make sure you are looking at counterarguments and really proving why the bill should be passed. I also appreciate quality evidence and complete citation, which generally is the author, publisher, and year. "Out of the box" evidence is great but you need to make sure you are saying what the source is saying. Also please make it clear what is and isn't a direct quote.

In my time in congress, I have noticed that rounds almost always go better when debaters are allowed to make their own decisions about how to run the chamber. We have to work within tournament rules but if you all reach a consensus on ending early, going late, dropping or moving bills, or changing the docket, I will not stand in your way as the parli. Please keep in mind the other judges however, and be respectful of everyone's time.

Finally, be kind. Everyone comes from different backgrounds and viewpoints, and it is important to me that nobody feels like their identity or character is being personally targeted. Keep in mind that some topics may be more sensitive to others, and write your speeches accordingly. My general rule of thumb is that if your speech needs a trigger warning you should probably think about if there is any way to write it so that the warning is unnecessary. If you absolutely must have a trigger warning, please state your trigger warning before you start your speech. I am open to a variety of viewpoints but outright racism/sexism/homophobia will of course not fly. Please talk to me if you have any concerns about the speech material of yourself or someone else. You are all kind, smart, and respectful people, just do the right thing.

If you've made it this far, thanks for taking the time to read! If you have any questions before or after the round please feel free to ask. See you in the chamber!

Email: debate@inboxeen.com

**Be kind. Have fun. Don’t be afraid of me! I was once you and I know what it’s like! When I award speaks, they are heavily influenced by the level of kindness and congeniality shown in round. I am judging because I love the activity as much as you, and I want to help you do better if I can!**

School Affiliation(s)

Current Affiliation: East Chapel Hill HS

Current Role at Institution: I'm currently the Associate Director for Digital Communications at the Yale School of Management, but dedicate my off-time to S&D!

Previous Affiliation(s) and Role(s)

The Bronx High School of Science (Bronx, NY)

I coached primarily Public Forum Debate and Legislative Debate (Congressional Debate) at the Bronx High School of Science from roughly 2011-2015. I judged across all events – speech included. I began my coaching career at Bronx as an extemp coach.

River Valley High School (Mohave Valley, AZ)

I have judged and coached (primarily Public Forum) throughout the years since graduating from this school.

Debate Experience

River Valley High School (Mohave Valley, AZ)

I competed primarily in policy debate at River Valley High School in Mohave Valley, AZ. I also competed in other speech and debate events.

Columbia University in the City of New York (New York, NY)

I was a member of the Columbia Policy Debate team and competed for one year during my time in college.

Other

Tell me what to do – i.e. ‘tabula rasa’ insofar as one might even exist, and insofar as it might be helpful to roughly describe my ‘paradigm’.

Please ask specific questions at the beginning of the round for further clarification. E.g. my threshold for buying a reasonability standard has significantly heightened with age.

Run whatever you’d like – hypotesting, retro theory, nothing at all! I can handle it!

Most importantly, this is an educational activity and I believe in Debater/Debate -- i.e. you are more important than the round, so please speak up if you feel uncomfortable and tell me/your coach/tab immediately if something bothers you. I believe in the platinum rule - treat others as they'd like to be treated. Be kind to each other and have fun!