me: overlake '23; background in pf but i've done every single debate event except for policy; local and nat circ; 2.5th year debating im still a jr so im also still learning hehe
contact: email me @firstname.lastname@example.org, dm on insta or fb message me @anniexchen_ , call me @206-822-8873 if i haven't shown up in 20 mins or someone's dying.
exchange pronouns before round or default to they/them pronouns :)
i require opt-out trigger warnings (regardless of what event you do). in order for debate to happen it must be a safe environment. if ur reading a potentially sensitive arg but dk if it needs a tw, just read one. it literally takes 5 mins.
if ur opponents, or anyone at this tournament is making u feel uncomfortable. talk to me!! (contact info above) i'll make sure u feel safe <3
tldr: read bolded stuff down there if u've got some more time.
GENERAL FUN STUFF
i prefer a doc (email chain takes too long), but tbh wtvr idc.
for novices:if udk what specific terms in my paradigm mean, PLEASE ASK!! i'll be happy to explain my paradigm to u for 10 mins before round!! it's rly important for u to know how i make my decisions!!
will always (or at least try to) disclose unless tab reports me or smth, post-round mebut be respectful. lol ik it sucks to lose but there r def things that u could've done better, im happy to tell u as long as u don't make me feel uncomfortable :)
tech>truthbut no "discrimination good" related args. (well warranted war good/ extinction arguments r v entertaining imo). also well-warranted analytics >>>>>>>>>>> unwarranted cards.
i presume loser of the flipif:
a) neither teams extendoffense.
b) there's no comparative weighing.
c) it's so messy that i just dk what's going on anymore.
idc what u run, meme cases r encouraged (plz entertain me), but i will get pissed if u have more than 4 contentions.
don't try to cram in 7 turns and end up going for the 1 turn they've dropped for a more educational and less messy round.
offense should have impacts for me to vote off of them. (duh)
everything should be weighed, metaweighing is good.
2nd reb must fr offense, defense can wait until second sum idc do wtvr.
dropped defense from 2nd rebuttal is sticky for 1st summary. so 2nd summary it is ur responsibility to anticipate and respond to defense they might extend in 1st ff.
i will get VERY pissed if the way you extend are either a) saying that "extend li 18'" and be done; or b) trying to reread every single card from your case. summarize ur arg,extend cards if u want but most importantly, WARRANTS!
don't flow cx but is paying some attention :((
i don't like calling for cards but will do so if a) it becomes rly important; b) it seems interesting/ misconstrued; or (this won't influence my decision) c) someone tells me to in ff
try not to give me new weighing in ff: new weighing in 1st ff is ok but not preferred.
idc if you read from paraphrased cards/ cut cards but whenyour opponents ask for evidence, you MUST PROVIDE them in the version of cut cards, i despise evidence exchange in the format of "oH hERe iS a LinK aND u CAn cONtrOl F __" it takes SIGNIFICANTLY longer. also (for online debate) don't use the chat function on any platforms to exchange evidence because the formatting is important!!!
i won't count reading cards towards your prep. trying to look at 5 lines in 3 secs is just dumb. also speak boost if u don't call for any cards.
ik how theory works but only run it if there's a legit violation, i personally don't believe that theory should be used to set norms, instead, it should be used to check for in round abuse. (i.e: tw theory is good, paraphrasing theory only acceptable if they misconstrue key ev, etc.)
idk how ks or trix work so...
speeches over 250 wpm require docs bc im dumb and might end up with like 2 words on my flow.
im really receptive to pre-fiat and structural violence arguments, i find these conversations more meaningful than some random high schoolers talking about nuke war.
SPEAKS THIS IS THE MOST ENTERTAINING PART
L20s if ur being discriminatory in ANY form (__ism, __ia, etc.) or if u don't give a tw. i will drop u, give u a 0, end the round, and report u to tab if it was just not tolerable.
auto 30 if ur meme case/ k was genuinely funny.
will deduct speaks if u go over time, 26 max if u don't shut up at 30 secs over. i wanna eat.
will deduct speaks once you take over 10 secs to get a card.
if u disclose at least 30 mins before round (let us know at least 30 mins before round and where u've disclosed: ndca wiki, emailed, etc.) +0.1 for first 3--last 3 or open-source w/o highlights, +0.3 for complete open-source. BUT IF I SEE U TAKING DOWN UR CASE AFTER ROUND ENDS, I WILL TANK UR SPEAKS.
+0.8 if ur a novice first time competing in open, or a one-team school, or doesn't have a coach. also lmk if ur all 3 lol. u got this!!! (will tank ur speaks if u lie and say that u r when u aren't)
-0.3 every time you say "my time starts in 3,2,1" or "off-time roadmap" or "is __ ready? is __ ready? is __ ready?" ik when ur time starts and off-time roadmaps r fine but literally stfu and just give it thanks.
u can call a tko if u think ur opponents don't have any offense but u do. will end the round and disclose immediately. w+30 if ur right, l+25 if ur wrong.
fun speaks, all of these things will happen before round
+0.1 everytime u make a taylor swift/ kdrama reference in ur speech
+0.1 if u recommend a book to me that i find interesting (after u explain the plot), -0.1 if i don't
+0.1 if u follow me on insta (yes that's important too, tell me)
+0.1 if our zodiac signs r compatible (i won't ask so tell me voluntarily)--50% or higher; -0.1 if we aren't :(
+0.1 if u know who my fav debate god is (3 tries), -0.1 if u get it wrong. *hint: eastriver delink
i (hate) strongly (hate) dislike (hate) it
i don't think i will ever judge policy. but if i do, i know the basics of prog but idk policy jargon. just do wtvr the crap yall do plz don't adjust the way u debate bc of me and my emphasis on warrant. but 1) u can spread but plz enunciate, i will stop flowing off of ur doc after i say "clear" for the 4th time. 2) don't dump cards, try to give warrants PLEASE!!! the amount of times i've written "wtf how" on policy flows is j not funny.
i will place you first if u spread. im dead serious.
Last changed on
Sun June 12, 2022 at 6:56 AM PDT
My name is Bren Hamaguchi and I am the assistant Speech and Debate coach of Overlake HS.
I want to be clear: I have no prior experience participating in or judging Speech or Debate (this was my first season). But, as a history teacher, I am familiar with how to construct an argument, thesis, use of evidence, some philosophy, and persuasive speaking techniques.
I have no overt biases that will affect the decisions that I render.
Speed - I have a difficult time following along when people talk fast, I'll do my best, but if I don't write it down there is a good chance I'll forget and I can't judge you on information I don't have. You can send me your case if you think you speak too fast.
LD - Philosophy and Theory - if you're going to run theory or use a philosophical argument make it clear. If you reference something you think a Lay judge might not understand, either thoroughly explain it during your time or don't bother.
K’s: I just recently learned about what K’s are and I’m still on the fence. Make sure you are clear if you run a K. Be clear with your links.
LD/PF - ESPECIALLY PF - Be courteous! I really dislike when competitors are rude to each other.
Congress - I have my B.A. in Political Science so I am very aware of congressional procedure and how to construct arguments for and against bills. It is still up to you to follow proper procedure and to structure your speeches in accordance with the rules and regulations.
TLDR: Do whatever you want just don't be a jerk in rounds thanks :))
1. everything must be responded to in the speech after with the exception of constructive (2nd rebuttal must engage with 1st rebuttal, 1st summary must engage with second rebuttal) + everything that you want me to vote off of has to be in summary
2. Collapse, i.e. don't tell me 5 arguments at once go for probably your two strongest ones
3. Be nice in cross I'm not paying attention so don't be rude for pErcEpTuaL domInance
4. I flip a coin to presume if there is no offense, no weighing, or I'm just really really confused
1. everything in PF applies to LD 2. You don't have to win your value criterion for me to vote you up. If you lose the value criterion debate but you prove that you solve for your opponent's value criterion better, I'll still vote for you.
3. I have little experience in LD treat me as a debate judge that understands how debate arguments work but knows less about the philosophical side of LD (framing and stuff is fine just don't use too much jargon)
good speaks = smart strategic decisions, good organizations, be a nice person = auto 29 or higher :))
Last changed on
Sat March 28, 2020 at 2:48 AM PDT
My name is Robin Monteith and i am the coach for The Overlake School in Remond, Wa. I am a parent coach and was introduced to speech and debate through being a parent judge. This is my second year judging at speech and debate competitions. Both years, I judged PF, LD, Congress, and many speech categories. I have no policy experience. I became a coach this year, and coach students in many speech categories, PF, LD, and Congress. My educational background is in psychology and social work.
I am looking for students to convince me that the side they are arguing on is right. I like statistics, but am also looking for the big picture. It will help if you give a clear and highly organized case. Make sure that you don't talk so fast that you lose your enunciation. Also, remember that I am trying to write and process what you are saying so if you are talking really fast some of your arguments may be missed. While the point of debate is to take apart your opponents case, I do not like it when teams get too aggressive or cross the line into being rude. I value both argument and style in that I think your style can help get your argument across or not get it across well. Don't do theory or Kritiks. I am not a flow judge, but do take extensive notes. You need to extend arguments in your summary and final focus and I will disregard any new arguments presented in final focus as this is unfair to your opponents. In summary I like for you to summarize the debate for me. Both your side and your opponents. In final focus I want to hear voters. Why do you think you won the debate. What evidence did you present that outweighs your opponents evidence, etc.
Preferred email: email@example.com
Last changed on
Sat May 21, 2022 at 3:04 AM PDT
4 years of debate experience. State finaled for Public Forum and Oratory. I've also competed at NSDA Nationals & NIETOC.
speed is fine as long as you enunciate
collapse in summary; don't wait until FF
if you drop something in summary, I won't weigh it
I don't flow cross, but I'll listen if new information is brought up
I like tech debate just as much as I enjoy lay debate and good speeches. Just use good evidence ethics and be respectful :)
Erik Alexander Vank
Last changed on
Sat May 21, 2022 at 7:23 AM PDT
2 years of PF experience.
Speed is fine as long as you enunciate
If you drop something in summary, I won't weigh it
No new arguments in final focus
I don't flow cross
I enjoy lay debate and good speeches. Just use good evidence ethics and be respectful to everyone.