Words flow like a river, clear and true,

With a voice that echoes, and a message to pursue,

A battle of wits, a test of might

Give me a good debate, I'll judge you right

Quickly I’ll down, those who don’t speak

You are here to learn, so OPEN YOUR BEAK

Don’t be annoying, don’t be mean, Don’t be stupid. Just be good!

I do congress and therefore I am lay

If I am offered a subway cookay, I may just become flay

And if I am given salty MickyDeez fries, my judging may sway

And if I receive a spicy combo with a large lemonade and no ice from chick-fil-a, I may just vote on the K

Thats a joke in case that isn’t clear.

I am a lay judge but that really just means I need competitors to not spread and relax with the debate jargon. I understand the technicalities of LD and PF so I’m not oblivious to how arguments should be considered, however only substance please I don’t know how to evaluate theory and Ks and all that. Additionally, I am of the belief that dropped arguments are TRUE. Make it easy for me to judge, keep it simple, and weigh well.

ABOVE ALL - PLEASE SPEAK CLEARLY

speak good do good

Content:

I will evaluate the debate primarily on the basis of content. This means that I will be looking for debaters who have a deep understanding of the resolution, can present their arguments clearly and concisely, and can respond effectively to their opponents' arguments. I will also be looking for debaters who can use evidence effectively to support their claims.

Speaking:

While speaking is not as important to me as content, I will still evaluate debaters on their speaking skills. I will be looking for debaters who speak clearly and at a reasonable pace, and who are able to articulate their arguments in a way that is easy to understand. I will also be looking for debaters who are respectful of their opponents and the judges.

No theory, kritiks, etc.:

I will not be evaluating debaters on their ability to argue theory or kritiks. I believe that debates should be focused on the resolution at hand, and I do not want to encourage debaters to use technical arguments to avoid engaging with the substance of the topic.

No evidence manipulation, paraphrase:

I expect debaters to use evidence fairly and accurately. I will not tolerate evidence manipulation or paraphrase. If I find that a debater is manipulating or paraphrasing evidence, I will view this as a serious violation of the rules of debate.

My Background:

I have competed in Congressional Debate and Extemporaneous Speaking for 4 years, so I value delivery as well as simple argumentation.

Congress: I like confidence, delivery, vocal variation, and a simple logic chain that can be defended in questioning. I like new arguments at the beginning of the round, warrant-level refutation in the middle of the round, and pure blood bath refutation if you are giving the last speech with rhetoric as well.

Extemp: Answer the question, have vocal variation, be funny, be fluent, be your best.

PF/ LD: I'm listening for simple easy to understand arguments. Don't make me do the work, it is your job to spoon-feed me the argument: the claim, warrant, link chain, and impact.

Anything Else: Treat me as a lay judge.

Congress:

Congress isn't entirely one genre of speech and debate it's a culmination of just about every style. I don't lean toward favoring a lay debater or a flow debater. In this event, you're just trying to convince the judge to rank you whatever means you go about doing that is 100% up to you. However, if you're able to balance both the flow and lay appeal you're going to rank higher in my ballots than someone who's just good at one or the other.

For PO's: Run the round as smoothly and quickly as possible. I'll grade you on how well you can keep the round on track and avoid disruptions. The more the parli has to intervene(within reason, I won't fault you for asking for the specific rules of the tournament) the lower I'll rank you.

Local/TX Circuit: Please Clash

LD: I don’t have a preference on which style of LD you choose to do. Whether it’s modern or classic is fully up to you I will grade each style equally.

PF: I find PF strategy really interesting I’m more of a flow judge but I can ealso be influenced by the lay although not as strongly.