LD:

I have not been involved in LD debate for 10 years so feel free to ask me questions if my paradigm below does not cover something. I am very rusty on a lot of the LD debate specific jargon, so be cautious of using certain abbreviations without clarifying first. More fundamental terms (or terms core to the traditional LD structure) such as "constructive", "contention", "rebuttal", "CX", "Card", "2AR", "1NC", are fine.

I will be judging based on a traditional format of LD debate. To elaborate:

1. You can speak moderately fast, but I expect you to pronounce words clearly. I place a higher value on the quality of your contentions and arguments rather than overloading with sheer quantity. I will not be giving much credence to arguments that are spoken too fast to understand.
2. I expect both sides should address all opposing points. Weakly addressed arguments and dropped arguments will negatively affect you. You may point out when an opponent has dropped an argument or failed to address its essence but don't overdo it. I will be keeping track myself and take it into account. The only exception to this is (rare) completely nonsensical arguments. If in doubt, address the argument.
3. I expect a clear connection between the resolution, contentions, value, and value criterion. I expect conflict on multiple levels including which of your values are more important, whether the criteria used are the best way to measure said values, and how well your contentions actually support your values.
4. I will not be judging using my personal opinions and aim to remain as objective as possible. Your arguments will be evaluated based on how well you can logically argue and support them, and how well you can logically attack your opponent's points. With that said, good public speaking technique IS very much appreciated and may be considered, especially in a very close debate.
5. Voting issues towards the last 2-3 minutes of final rebuttals are preferred and will have some weight, though not strictly necessary.
6. I will not be particularly receptive of kritik's. I expect you to fully engage with the resolution as it is presented. If the opponent brings up a kritik, I do expect the opponent to address it, but its importance will not be weighted as heavily as the other things mentioned in my paradigm.

PF:

I have very little experience with PF debate, so please be cautious when using jargon unique to PF. With that said, most of the points above apply (ignoring points that are unique to LD debate such as value, value criterion).

Hi, my name is Holly Garrison (They/Them) and I'll be your judge.

I have done debate for long enough to understand how most of this stuff works. I'm a senior at Colleyville Heritage.

You don't have to but if you do make an email chain add me at Hollydebate22@gmail.com

PF

• Tech over truth(If you make an argument back it up)
• I'm okay with progressive arguments
• Please don't spread My therapist said it was bad for me
• No bigotry, please
• It's PF so please don't run a K, there isn't enough time in a round to do the discussion justice so you are just reading it for a win
• When it comes to weighing my value, unless otherwise disproven, is utilitarianism(most good for most people)
• I don't flow crosses but I do pay attention
• #abolishgrandcross

LD

Short and Simple

• I will value any argument so long as it is not racist, sexist, homophobic, or anything bigoted.
• DO NOT spread. Even if you have a speech doc if you are not coherent I will not flow your argument.
• I'm very tech so if you are going to present an argument please provide some sort of evidence(either analytic or sourced)
• I prefer if teams disclose without it being a big deal but feel free to not disclose as long as you are speaking clearly
• I have experience with a lot of the theory arguments but if you are unsure if you should run something then show up early and ask me

Long and Complicated

Framework- I will value any framework. I do believe when submitting a framework you should have some definitions of your value and your criterion that way there can be an actual framework debate. I do like a good framework debate but I believe that they should have substance more than "framework is better." That said, I will still flow all framework debates. I also do not need a philosophy with your framework but if you have one more power to you.

Disclosure- I would prefer if everyone discloses sometime before your speech. I'm open to any form of disclosure(Speechdrop, Email chain, the new Tabroom speech drop, case list) so long as I get the speech doc. I also don't believe in this new contact disclosure theory so please don't run that.

Spreading and Speed-I'm fine with spreading and can handle a decent amount of speed. If you are going to go 80+ words per minute please send a speech doc and be clear in your delivery. If you are just mumbling to try and get out all 6 of your contentions then I will shout "clear" that way I can understand you.

Topicality -I need either limits or grounds to flow them and I need appropriate voters to properly value them. Do not just stand up and call your opponent abusive and tell me to strike them. Tell me why your opponent's argument shouldn't be valued or I will still keep it on my flow.

Theory- Like topicality, I typically need some grounds and you CANNOT just stand up and call your opponent abusive. Theory(when done well) will be valued first before impacts so please if you are reading some sort of theory or theory shell please just do it well.

Kritiks- I've read some of the literature(Edelman, Puar, Marx, Engles, Fisher) but I've never loved K debates. If you want to read a K I do have high expectations because you are purposefully changing the round away from the resolution so I need this to be a well-thought-out argument if you are planning on running some like a K.

DA's- For the Disadvantage to win it needs to either Turn, Outweigh, or Solve the case. And I am not going to be doing the work for you on this one. Tell me why you are winning and show me where you are winning.

Counter Plans- I will always love counter plans. I think, when done well, they are really strong. Just make sure that if your opponent doesn't provide their own plan text your counter plan is against the whole resolution.

Perms- I understand perms and I think they are strong counters to counter plans but I need proper answers to the counter plan and not just "perm do both"

Plan/No plan aff- I do not require a plan on the aff and I'm ok with any type of affs so long as they're clear and understandable. So long as the argument isn't bigoted I'll flow it.

Tricks/Spikes/Small Abusive stuff-Please don't. If you do decide to run these arguments just try to keep them fair.

I prefer if everyone keeps their own time. I will have a stopwatch going to keep your time but the round will go a lot smoother if you keep your own time. I will allow a grace period of about 10 seconds before I just stop flowing and I will cut you off after about 25 seconds over.

Also, try to pay attention during the round but if you need to check your phone or type something just don't be disruptive

If you have any questions before or after the round please email me at Hollydebate22@gmail.com

Let's have a good round y'all

I am a parent judge, who has judged a reasonable number of rounds. You may speak fast, as long as you are understandable. Cite your sources as much as possible. If you call for evidence outside of cross-ex, you will be using your prep time. Also, please avoid asking super long questions during cross-ex, and allow the other team to answer. I give speaker points based on strategy and presentation. I may dock your speaks if you take forever to pull up a piece of evidence. To avoid this, please start an email chain and add me at subashri.r@gmail.com.

Debate is about having fun, enjoy it!!

Hello. English is not my first language, so please go slow. I would like you to clearly explain your arguments and convey the same logical line of reasoning for an argument throughout the entire round (don't change the warrants of an argument halfway through). Please be organized in your speeches and comparative in your analysis. Additionally, please time yourselves, and do not post-round me afterwards. Good luck to all!

I am a parent judge with 10 years history. Normal conversation speed will help me get your points and write them down.