Hey everyone! I'm so excited to be your judge!

I am a freshman at the University of Utah. I competed for the Northridge High School debate team all 3 years. I was a captain my junior and senior years. I am a 3-time qualifier to the national tournament (2x in BQ and 1x in INFO). Please don't be intimidated by this, I just say this so everyone knows that I know my stuff LOL. My goal is for every debate to be judged as fairly as possible.

I want to flood you with feedback and comments. I cannot tell you how many times I got ballots with a loss or low speaker points, then just to get a comment that says "Great job!" and nothing else. I PROMISE that won't happen with me.

Note: If anything I say inherently goes against what you have already prepared (like my case preferences, for example), don't try to rush and change it. These are just general suggestions.

General Paradigm:

Cases: I expect you to provide the causality in your case. Never only read to me a bunch of cards, statistics, opinions, quotes, etc. and expect me to believe you; go in depth. Explain why your argument is important and how it links. A well developed case is a great first impression, so use it as a strategy. I'm easy to impress with a good case.

Framework: I don't really like frameworks like utilitarianism, pragmatism, cost-benefit analysis, etc. I'm voting on impacts and major concepts in the round, not who better upholds one particular standard. Burdens of proof are fine with me, but don't spend too much time on it. Establish it once and focus more on general argumentation.

Definitions: Please only provide definitions if they are absolutely necessary. I'm educated, I know what things are.

Cross: I will not flow anything said in cross. If it was said in cross and you want me to vote on it, bring it up in rebuttal. While I don't flow cross, it may have an impact on my decision and speaker points (that is, I take all things into consideration). Please ask concise questions and give concise answers. If your opponent is taking a long time to answer, I'm fine if you interrupt, but actually give them an opportunity to speak. It's a clarification segment, not a scream fest. Passive aggression in cross is so entertaining to me, but be cautious about it.

Rebuttal: Your rebuttal is not a constructive speech. Please do not start by going over your case again, I will have just heard it. Clash against your opponents points. If you want to cross apply your case to theirs, do so. I don't need you to reexplain the arguments I just wrote down. In rebuttals, make sure not to solely focus on nit-picky details. Go over the larger concepts of the debate. Remember not to bring up any new attacks past rebuttals; I will not consider such new arguments.

Impacts: PLEASE give impacts. Whether you do a full impact calculus talking about scope, magnitude, substantiality, etc. or simply compare the effects of the arguments, I need impacts and weighing. The goal of debate is never to get your judge to agree with you, but rather, to show why you debate better, which means comparing your arguments.

Voters: I expect you to give me the reasons why you won the debate in the final speech. Don't beat a dead horse by trying to prove your arguments, simply talk about the largest reasons why you should win.

Speaking: Your speaking should be clear, concise, and confident as you possibly can make it be. Avoid filler words such as "like" and "umm" as well as unnecessary phrases like "ultimately," "specifically" (especially not this one haha) or "goes on to show." Get to the point, I know how to follow a flow without the extra "fluff." Try not to speak too slow or contain too many long pauses in your speech. (If you are in policy, ignore this and read my event specific paradigm). Eminem rap battles and debate should have never been conflated, so please for the LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY DO NOT SPREAD. Thank you :)

Event-Specific Paradigm:

LD:

I prefer a traditional value/criterion structure. Your value should be as topical/close to the resolution as possible.

Avoid utilitarianism and pragmatism. Criterions should be measurable, and prag/util are very vague.

I don't like K's or anything crazy in LD.

Arguments about morality are more important to me than philosophy or statistics.

In the negative constructive, I prefer 4 minutes of case and 3 minutes of rebuttal.

Voting issues should be given in the final speeches.

PF:

Provide links for everything.

I care more about impacts than the warrants of your arguments. Convince me why your argument is more impactful, not more correct.

Rely on your partners.

If you call for one of your opponents cards and point out a flaw in it, you will look so smart to me.

In grand cross, I only want to hear the major points, nothing new or small.

Policy:

I will be 100% honest. If you get me as your judge for policy, I'm so sorry. I hate this event with a passion. That being said, I don't even care what you run, as long as it is done well.

Although I will secretly be dying inside, I'm ok if you spread in policy :/ please include me in an email chain

rylanearnhart2117@outlook.com

If you do spread, but you are all mumbled, lost in your place, stumbling or pausing a lot, I will reflect such in your speaker points.

I don't really like K's or theory, so be cautious. There needs to be an abundantly clear link, or else I don't buy the point. I really don't want to hear a Cap K, not that I'm secretly a raging capitalist or anything ahaha, but it just gets so repetitive.

Counterplans should be as specific as possible and should contain evidence.

Note: If ANY of your arguments are racist, sexist, ableist, nationalist, homophobic, religiously discriminatory, etc. in ANY degree, you will lose the round no questions asked :)

Please do not run a joke case, I'm taking time out of my day to listen to you and there are competitors who genuinely are trying to do well.

Remember to attack the arguments, not the people presenting them.

Debate is such a party! Have so much fun with it :)

Any questions on the feedback I give? Let me know rylanearnhart2117@outlook.com

Best of luck!

No spreading. I don't judge cross.