Debbie Johnson Texas Novice Championship
2022 — NSDA Campus, TX/US
Extemp Paradigm ListAll Paradigms: Show Hide
I am a freshman at Texas A&M.
I love interesting intros/Taylor Swift intros/humor. Congress speeches should be dynamic and interesting.
I like good debate, congress is not a speech event. Please please please have clash. You should not be
I really like it when people flip speeches to the needs of the round because I think it means that you have a full hand on the debate.
Please don't give constructive speeches late in round. I want to see clashes/crystals/adaptation.
I am also pretty harsh on POs, especially in finals rounds. Please don't use POing as an easy break/easy way to get top 5.
Hi! My email is firstname.lastname@example.org, please add me to any email chains
Please draw the lines in the debate for me, I'll go off of what the debaters tell me so impact calc is important as well as warranting and drawing the link chains. I don't really believe in Ks, T, or theorys in PF, I'm fine with the latter if there's actual abuse in the round however. Don't be mean in cross, I'll lower your speaks for it. I'm fine with speed, please just warn me ahead of time. I'll also need a heads up on the amount of arguments gonna be run so I can plan out my flows
I'm a big fan of umbrella answers and the three point substructure, other than that just answer the question lol
Speech and Debate is a fun event, please try to keep it as non-toxic and as inclusive as possible :)
My competition background is in both foreign and domestic extemp on a national level. I prioritize content and presentation equally, you can't have a solid extemp speech without both.
- The most important thing is that you answer the question as clearly as possible. This includes previewing your points, signposting throughout, and reviewing your points at the end that links into the conclusion. Adding a clear structure adds to the impact and value of your overall speech.
- Impacts should be diverse and clearly articulated
- Timing should be around 7 minutes; 7:30 only if necessary
- An ideal amount of sources for each point is 2-3. I would like to see more logical appeals rather than emotional. However, if your use of an emotional story precisely conveys your point and adds to the speech then no problem, just don’t make the whole speech based on narrative.
- I don't mind canned intros in Extemp, but at least make them connected to the prompt.
-On trigger/content warnings, I personally don't need one, but fellow competitors may (a TW/CW might be needed for graphic depictions of SA, DV, abuse, etc.). Just use proper caution and be mindful of your audience.
**bonus points if you have a funny or interesting ADG and/or on-tops :)
yes, email chain email@example.com
- Treat me like a parent judge that has experience with the event
- No spreading! Spreading is just hard to understand and I know PF as an event is straying from its traditional form of speaking and argumentation but the bottom line is, I will not flow your argument if you spread it.
- I'll flow whatever argument you tell me to during round--> implicate your offense and tell me why you are winning
- Winning my vote is pretty simple: I will vote for whoever is the most persuasive --> I suggest you focus on persuasion and the quality of your arguments which means weighing your arguments against the opposing team. I would like if you create a lens to view the round by weighing turns, evidence, uniqueness etc.
Overall debate is supposed to be fun so I am always open to any crazy, out of the way argument you want to run (warning: make sure its understandable thats all!).
Good luck and have fun!
Hi, I'm Katherine Peckham, a junior at Westwood and I'm TFA qualified this year. My background leans more towards foreign extemp but I'm well versed in all current events. I evaluate presentation a bit more strongly than content, but I expect well developed content.
Racism or bigotry in your speech will get you dropped ranks. I personally don't need any trigger warnings, but please check with anyone else in the room. My pronouns are they/them and consistently misgendering me will get you dropped ranks.
Let me know if you need time signals, I'm comfortable with the standard 5 down but let me know what you prefer. I am also okay with virtual competitors timing themselves as long as you tell me where your flow is.
My perfect speech is like an essay. I want to see well warranted claims, clear subpoints and interesting on-tops along with . Ideally, you would use higher-level sourcing as well, but relevant and reputable sources (especially local sources) work well.
For presentation, I prioritize vocal variation over fluency but in close rounds, I will use fluency as a metric to compare one speaker against the rest. I don't mind if you use your hands more often as long as they are used intentionally. I'd prefer to see a variety of well-chosen hand gestures than very few on only important words.
Westwood '22, King's College London '25.
TOC'21, '22. NSDA '21, '22, ETOC '21, '22
Best at judging speech, congress, PF. Bad for LD/Policy.
TLDR; Answer the question as best as you can, try to engage me and other members of the audience, have strong evidence to back up your claims.
I judge on content then delivery. I'll only rank you down for delivery if you have errors that impede my ability to understand your speech, or if someone else in the room had content as good as yours but was more conversational and engaging.
Substructure is essential to build up strong links between your As, Bs, and Is. Without those link chains, your points don't really answer the question.
Sources are friends -- make sure you use them well, to justify claims and to analyze situations. Locals and Think Tanks are best, but I won't hold you citing dailies against you.
Wit, humour, and clarity elevate speeches from good to great. I love good AGDs and creative taglines and transitions.
My standard time signals are 5 down, in virtual feel free to time yourself. The extemp triangle is helpful in both in-person and virtual environments, but I totally understand if its unfeasible when you're behind a laptop screen.
Respect the communities and issues you speak about, I will drop you for bigotry.
Best of luck! Don't be afraid to run a slightly unorthodox substructure or argument, as FDR once said, “It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.”
Public Forum Debate - tech >> truth, flow judge.
Good with speed/spreading, though if you do I'd prefer that you make a speech doc and send it to me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Good with theory. I don’t require frontlining in the 2nd rebuttal, but I prefer it. Please extend your args throughout the debate. Weigh Weigh Weigh Weigh Weigh. Signposting before speeches preferable.
I'll evaluate disclosure/para theory.
I try to intervene in round as little as humanly possible, will vote off the flow.
Speaks will probably go from 28.5 to 30 in most cases, only lower if I couldn't understand you or if you were bigoted in round.
In pf, all you need for high speaks from me is to debate ethically and respect your opponents and partner.
Strike me if you run tricks.
For a longer version -- check Amogh Mahambare's PF paradigm
PO - know what you’re doing, and you have a place on my ballot; I’ll forgive any minor mistakes with regards to precedence or recency. Offer time signals to people that want them (not as necessary in virtual), and keep track of speaking time and recency.
Everyone Else -- Giving two good speeches is better than giving three mediocre ones; extemp-level analysis is essential to being on my ballot -- 2 points, at least two sources per point of analysis.
Try to make sure there’s a decent aff/neg split and clash as a chamber.
Portray yourself confidently.
Don’t be overly aggressive in cross, especially to womxn debaters. Just like the other events -- no bigotry.
Extemper and PFer
Content comes first and it has to at least make sense. There should be a logical flow present in all your points. I have a 2 point rule. In an extemp speech I there are usually 3 points, however, if one of the points makes no sense/doesn't answer the question, I will not give you credit for it. If your point can be easily argued otherwise, or is factually incorrect/misleading but still follows a logical process, I will give you only 0.5 points. If you don't get 2 points, there is very very slim chance that you will get the 1 in the room.
Presentation can really push you to the top. Presentation includes language, voice intonation, expression, and hand gestures. This aspect of extemp is also very important and can help with the understanding of the speech as a whole. I believe that better fluency is usually an indication of better content as well, so be confident in your content and the presentation will come naturally. I will not dock you for a lack of presentational skills, but I could rank you up because of them. After all, this is a speech event.
Time Management plays a final factor. Rather than focusing on whether or not you got under the 7-minute time limit, it's more about the balance of your speech. I value equally spaced points/analysis and speakers who don't give importance to just one point.
tech>truth, flow judge
Everything needs to be warranted and linked clearly and there need to be clear extensions through every speech or I will consider it dropped. New arguments in the 2nd summary are simply too late. Impact weighing is perhaps the most important part of the debate and I will vote on who won the best impacts. Signpost before speeches. If something is conceded or you want to bring up an important point from the cross, blow it up in a speech. In that way, the cross does matter. If both teams want to skip grand cross that's good with me.
All evidence needs to be warranted and I will not consider assertions at all
warranted evidence > warrants > unwarranted evidence > assertions
I strongly dislike misconstrued evidence. I strongly encourage cut cards, and, to encourage this, I will boost your speaks by 0.2 points if you read non-paraphrased cases. Just show me before the round.
I call for evidence in a couple of scenarios:
1) Someone tells me to read it during a speech
2) There is substantial time spent in the round over what it says
3) Something sounds factually incorrect
4) The way you portray the evidence seems to shift as the round progresses
I have a general understanding of most criticisms read in debate(i.e. Anti-blackness, South Asian identity, Settler Colonialism, Feminism, Queer/Quare/Kuaerness, and Disability) I think, especially in PF, linking the K to the resolution or a specific argument is highly important. Although I'm not as well-read up as policy or LD debaters, if you understand your criticism and you are willing to do the work to explain and contextualize your offense, you'll probably be fine.
While I think counter plans should become a part of PF, the NSDA rules state that no counter plans are allowed and the whole resolution must be debated. Consider changing it into the form of a disad.
I haven't been a part of too many theory debates, and I have a lot more learning to do. However, for me, it comes down to doing real comparative work on the level of interpretations and standards. It is about answering these questions: what type of norms do we want to set in this activity/topic? Why? Why does it matter if the violation is true? What is the threshold to meet your interpretation? I think innovative or unconventional topicality and theory arguments (on either side) can make for very interesting discussions about the norms of the activity, i.e. arguments about identity, body politics, performativity, agency, boredom, death, simulation, or educational models.
I will buy into any framework presented and try to adopt the mindset of the winning framework.
Content is very important-- your points need to be logical, easy to follow, and specific to the question. If you don't explain your content properly, even if I know what you mean, you will probably get ranked down. Treat me like a lay judge that reads dailies.
- Please back stats, info, etc. with credible SOURCES: source name, date with month/day/year
* if you use cool sources like thinktanks, books, etc. you will impress me more than random dailies.
Fluency is important. Make your speech interesting and engaging. I love humor, but anything in general that draws me in is great.
- Timing is kinda important-- if you go way under (<5:30 min) or way over (>7:30) I will likely rank you down. Between 6:50 and 7:00 is *chef's kiss*
* remember extemp triangle!
- If you have a funny AGD and good on-tops, you will impress me.
Again, fluency is important. Draw me in, make the speech your own. Appropriate humor stands out.
For debate, please add me to email chain: email@example.com
- Please keep your own time
Good luck! Y'all got this :)