Hello, I was a former policy, extemp, and lincoln douglas debater during my high school days. It's been a while though.

Extemp: please provide as many sources as you can. I prioritize evidence over eloquence.

Policy:

I don't particularly care for kritiks and theory; I prefer the standard counterplan/disad/ style of debate. Solvency is a dealbreaker for me, and I judge by the traditional policy-making paradigm.

Lincoln Douglas: Value criterions are number one for me and qualify as the standard through which I will judge the round.

Last note: I will take points off if you're a jerk or unnecessarily mean. It degrades the round and yourself, and I speak from experience. Have fun and don't stress.

haku haku, my name is Alanna Cronk. My email is alannacronk@gmail.com

First things first:

Access

Accessibility is extremely important to me. If you have any access needs, let me know at the beginning of the round. I will not ask about your disability, just say what you need, and I will do my best to arrange for it.

Who I am

Speech and Debate Coach for La Reina since 2021. I graduated from Georgetown University in 2023 with a degree in philosophy. I competed in speech and debate for four years. When I was a sophomore, I won the state championship in original oratory. I also attended Dartmouth Debate Institute (DDI) for policy debate. I would consider myself much more knowledgeable than a lay parent but not as agile as a TOC-qualified debater. I get 95% of the lingo and tech, but fast spreading will confuse me. I'm also probably not up to date on the LD topic. I last debated in 2016 so make sure you are explaining tech thoroughly, things have changed since I was in the game.

Debate Stuff:

TLDR: You do you. The stuff we talk about in debate has real-world consequences, be considerate of others, especially your opponent. Don't carelessly manipulate rhetoric about very real oppression for the sake of winning a ballot, it could cost you the round. Make it easy for me to know what is going on, explain your ideas/the topic thoroughly. Please keep the line by line in order and slow down on tags.

LOVE

• Im great for niche phil args, but I will 100% be able to pick it up if you don't understand your own arguments
• Ks, K affs
• Framework debates
• Thorough T debate
• non-spreading debate

NOT A FAN

• tricks
• death good
• fast spreading

OTHER

• As an Indigenous person, I am strongly suspicious of people reading Indigenous pain narratives as a "clever" strategy to win a round. If you are in true solidarity with the Indigenous community, then I welcome these discussions. If you think it's a niche approach that will throw off your opponent and "out-liberal" them, I will be unhappy.

• You need to put content warnings for racial/settler/ableist/anti-queer/gender-based/sexual violence and anything to do with suicide. If you are running something that has one of these things mentioned, you also need to be ready to read something else if someone asks you to, no question. When you read these positions, ask yourself - are you showing up for these communities outside of the round? Are you aware of the history of this group and the current issues important to this group outside of your case? There is a difference between talking about violence and oppression because the topic genuinely calls for it and commodifying the ongoing violence that negatively impacts people's lives so that you can win a debate round.

• Accessibility is everything to me, if your opponent asks for no spreading and you spread anyways, you will receive an L-25. It is possible to have a good round with good clash and good education without spreading.

• In general, tech over truth, I am not going to weigh something that I know is factually incorrect against anyone unless it is said in a round--you need to do the debating.

• If you are a circuit/varsity debater, and you are debating a traditional/novice debater, and you act rude and condescending, spread them out, read 6 off, using tons of jargon, etc., you will also receive an L-25. Be kind.

Much of this was stolen from Andrea Chow. I agree with most of the philosophical aspects in Andrea's paradigm.

I was the Asst. Coach for Wm. S. Hart High School in Newhall, CA from 2015 to 2023. I have recently moved to Nevada.

I have judged IEs for 26 years.

I have judged Congress for 23 years.

I have been judging LD, Parlie and PoFo for 20 years. I do NOT do Policy or Big Questions.

I ask that speakers avoid spreading and/or reading/speaking at an excessive rate of speed. Communication is paramount.

Respectfulness and courtesy are required at all times.

As a competitor, please do not tell me what decision I have to make. I'll decide that for myself.

I do not disclose. Nor do I give any oral critiques prior to the tournaments ending, although once it's all over, I'm happy to discuss. My comments will be on the individual ballots and RFD.

I am a parent judge.

I judge based on the flow. Solid clash and preponderance of evidence is what really does It for me. Dropped arguments and unaddressed points are usually the deciding factors of my rounds but they need to be pointed out to be considered. A priori arguments and Kritiks usually don't work in PoFo so please don't stray from the topic just to derail the conversation. Spreading is frowned upon, but speak at whatever pace you want. If I cannot understand you I will let you know.  

Hello speakers, my name is Dimple. My experience with speech/debate began in 2020. I have remained active in the community as a speech and debate judge since then.

I'd like to share my judging style. I make my decision based on the speaker who best: formulated logical arguments, extended their arguments, and responded to their opponent's arguments. The language used in the round should be comprehensible, if not please define the terms. I prefer clarity over speed, if I don't understand what you are saying because of how fast you are spreading, that means I am not writing it down.

I do not like speaker's talking over each other during cross-examination. Please be respectful to your opponent. The winner of the round will be the speaker who made the best arguments, not the most aggressive or loudest. Also, please time yourselves. I will be taking time and notify you when time is up, but timing yourself is a great skill as you can determine how much time you have left.

Be mindful of the time, if your time is up. I will allow you to finish your last sentence but do not continue. All in all, I am excited to meet you all. I study delivery, as critical thinking is necessary throughout the round. Remember to be clear and state uniqueness, solvency, and impact of the policy/resolution. Take a deep breathe and show me all the hard work you have put in.

I debated Lincoln Douglas for 6+ years on the lay and circuit level and continue to participate in speech and debate events at UC Berkeley. I have experience judging a wide variety of formats. To win my ballot, spend a continuous amount of time explaining why you win and weighing impacts & evidence. I really like clear voters at the end of the debate to truly explain why I should vote your way.

Debate:

- I'm not picky about arguments and love to hear what ways you go about a topic.

- I prefer off-time road maps (but I do really love road maps!)

- I judge from the flow so please sign post. (if I don't know where to flow something I can't flow it)

- Be polite and respectful especially during CX

- I am a debater but please don't spread.

IE:

- I judge on content, performance, and charm (strong speech, pronunciation, and maybe a smile)

- I'll do my best with time signals, but if I miss one please take it as a compliment :)

Congress:

- Be respectful (attack the points, not the speakers)

- Try not to waste time (don't ask pointless questions)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My experience:

- High school and middle school Debate (Pofo, Policy, and LD)

- High school Speech (Impromptu and Extemp)

- High school Congress

- Judging (Middle School)