I am a lay judge and a volunteer parent.

Please don't talk too fast. Please allow time for your opponents to answer your questions and to ask questions .

I have read up on the topic. Looking forward to hearing your presentations!

I am a lay parent judge. Please be organized in your presentation -- I like solid arguments articulated clearly. Please don't talk too fast, mumble, speak softly, or do anything that would make it harder for me to follow -- give me a clear way to vote for you. I may ask for cards at the end.

Be civil: if you use foul language, you will automatically get a 25 in Speaker Points.

Be considerate: If you ask a question in crossfire, please allow your opponents to answer your questions. I need to hear two sides - it wouldn't be a debate otherwise.

I look forward to hearing all of your presentations -- have fun!

Don't spread & have fun! Thanks!

Hi! Here are my LD, PF, and Congress paradigms.

Email: carteree23@gmail.com

Debate experience/about me: I'm currently an English teacher in Philly but I'm heading to law school this fall. I spent seven years as an assistant coach for Phillipsburg HS in NJ where I coached the Congress program. I am on hiatus from coaching this year but I'm still judging a little bit-- not nearly as much as in previous years though. When I competed back in the day, I did mostly LD + sometimes Congress in Maine from 2010-2014, and did NFA-LD + a tiny tiny bit of speech at Lafayette College until 2016.

Drexel Law '27, Penn GSE '21 (MS.Ed), Lafayette '18 (BA)

----

LD

The short version: My background is pretty varied so I'm good with just about any arguments in round. I'm pretty tab; tech > truth; I want you to run whatever you think your best strategy is. A couple of specific preferences are outlined below.

Speed: I'm good with anything! If you're spreading just put me on the email chain.

DAs: I like DAs and enjoy policymaking debates in general but I am a little old school in that I don't really like when they have wild link chains and impacts just for the sake of outweighing on magnitude. I'm not gonna drop you for it but I think there are always better arguments out there.

T/Theory: Please save it for instances of legit abuse. I can keep up but there are definitely way better theory judges than me out there so keep that in mind.

Traditional: I competed on a small local circuit in high school and am always good for this type of round. Please weigh & give me voters!

Other stuff (CPs, Ks, aff ground): This is where the overarching "run whatever" ethos truly kicks in, though you should be mindful that I am getting very old and need you to err on the side of over-explaining anything new and hip. I love a good CP; PICs are fine, and I don't really buy condo bad. I was not a K debater when I competed but I've come to enjoy them a lot-- I am familiar with the basics in terms of lit and just make sure to explain it well. Plan affs? Absolutely yes. Performance affs? I think they're super cool. Just tell me where to vote.

And finally: have fun! Bring a sense of humor and the collegiality that makes debate such a special activity. I'll never, ever, ever drop you or even change your speaker points just for being an "aggressive" speaker, but please use your best judgment re: strat and speaking style-- i.e. if you're a varsity circuit debater hitting a novice, it's not the time for your wildest K at top speed, and that is something I'm willing to drop your speaks for.

You can ask me any further questions about my paradigm before the round.

---

PF

A lot of my PF thoughts are the same as LD so this will be very short (tl;dr -- run your best strategy, extend/weigh/give me voters, and I'll vote on the flow)! I do think it should be a different event with different conventions and too much progressive argumentation is probably not great for the overall direction of PF, but I won't drop you for it.

Also, I judge a fair amount but I've never coached PF and I am also getting old so I definitely don't have as much topic knowledge as you. Please err on the side of explaining acronyms/stock arguments/etc.

---

Congress

I did Congress as my second event in high school and it's what I primarily coached. I am a pretty frequent parli at NJ, PA, and national circuit tournaments.

I'm a flow judge and my #1 priority is the content of your speeches. While your speaking style and delivery is an important part of the overall package and I’ll mention it on ballots, it's called congressional debate for a reason, and I'll always rank a less polished speaker with better content higher than somebody who's a great orator but isn't advancing the debate. This may make me different than judges from a speech background, and that might reflect in my ranks-- but it's why we have multiple judges with different perspectives, and why it's so important to be well-rounded as a competitor.

I love a good first aff but they should follow a problem/solution structure. If you are speaking past the first aff I need to see great refutation and your arguments need to explicitly provide something new to the debate; don't rehash. Humanizing your impacts and explicitly weighing them is the quickest way to my ranks.

I don't have terribly strong opinions re: the PO-- just be fair, knowledgeable, and efficient and you'll rank.

I am a flow judge.

That is all.

For email chains/evidence exchange: chancey.asher@gmail.com

I am a lay parent judge. I am looking at Contentions, Rebuttals, Extend, Impact, Weighing. Also, I am looking at your links - if you are trying to link to an impact of 8 billion lives lost because whatever this debate is about will lead to global thermonuclear war and the end of humanity, I PROBABLY won't buy it.

What is your impact, and why is it greater than your opponent's impact?

I also love clean rounds. I start to lose focus when a round gets bogged down in technical disputes.

Put simply, weighing will win you my ballot. I want to see very clear comparative weighing, tell me exactly what to vote off of and why. If your claims and impacts are well-extended and weighed against your opponent's, I will give you the round.

Don't spread. It doesn't help anyone in the round if we can't understand you. I will value articulation and clarity in my decision if the round is technically messy. Especially online, slowing it down will definitely help you.

Be nice to each other. Not much more to say in this regard, kind of a no-brainer. Snark and rudeness will not win you the debate; you'll be dropped pretty quickly if you are mean.

I am tech over truth to an extent. I value how well you explain your link chains; if your opponent doesn't interact with your arguments at all and you extend them through round, they leave me little choice but to give you those impacts. However I personally dislike crazy link chains. Probably won't affect my decision but good for you to know anyway.

I will call for cards if it sounds like you are misconstruing or not telling the truth about your evidence. Please use evidence; warrantless impacts just won't be granted.

Parent judge.  Please speak clearly.  Don't spread.  

Like well-developed arguments with good logical reasoning.  Cross fire must be civil. Respect each other and enjoy the debate.

Summary and final focus are key.  Arguments need to be extended effectively.  Prioritize, weight and crystalize.  No need to add a new argument in the final focus. 

Have fun!

I am a lay judge. I am a French teacher at Cranbrook; my email address is bcherel@cranbrook.edu

Over the past 40 years, I loved to stay abreast of international affairs and geopolitics.

I am a truth over tech judge.

Please keep your speech under 200 words per minute.

I value eloquence.

I'm a volunteer and lay judge. I've read over some information about this topic and watched a demo video, but I'm new to judging. I am a pharmaceutical scientist in my day job and value evidence based arguments. Be clear and confident in your delivery and don't forget to have fun.

As a judge, I prefer for debates to stay on resolution / topic, does that mean I am more traditional, yes. The formats were formed for a reason and that should be followed. If you get too progressive, well please see what I initially started my paradigm with.

As for speed, can flow very well, however if it sounds like you are choking and cannot breathe, well you just dropped those contentions, cards, points, whatever you were trying to establish. In most things, quality outweighs quantity, like do you attend three, four, five colleges at once, no, no you do not that, you pick the one of highest quality and focus on that, so in that vein, remember, this is not policy, but either PF or LD and looking for quality during the rounds.

Please respect each other and have a great debate.

I have experience in PF debate of all levels (as a debater myself) so feel free to speak at a speed that is faster than what you would normally do for parent judges. Slight caveat, while I do flow this isn’t an excuse to speak so fast you need to take 5 quick breaths in 25 seconds nor is it an excuse to believe that I will flow your arguments for you. I understand the need to collapse arguments and evidence but if you do, at least make reference to that the fact you stated that evidence (either in Summary or Final Focus). Overall, I value strong Rebuttals and 2nd Cross Fires more than anything else. 9/10 debates I judge are won or lost between the Rebuttal and the Summary. Usually I weigh on clashing impacts that still remain at the end of the debate.

I am a lay parent volunteer and this is my fourth year judging debate but it has been a minute! I am a lawyer, and I was a litigator for over twenty years. So, I know how to put together an argument and I know a bad argument when I see it. A few things I will offer:

1. I recommend not filling your arguments with debate jargon. I am not familiar with these terms and using them isn't helpful to me. Making arguments like, "the other team did X debate thing while we did Y debate thing which is better," is not meaningful to me and so will not advance the ball for you. If there's something I need to know, just tell me.

2. Don't assume I know anything about your topic. I get that you have spent a lot of time researching and learning the topic, but I haven't, and that isn't my job as your judge. It is your job to educate and convince me. Be very clear about the components of your argument and likewise quickly break down your opponent's argument. This is extremely helpful to any judge when done well.

3. I'm a fast talker myself, but I find PF debaters can be in a category of their own. Please do not speak too quickly - I will not be able to fully follow or understand you. If you do need to speak quickly, make sure your speech is not monotone, which makes you even more difficult to follow.

4. I value "real-world" links. I will not weigh your impact, no matter how large, if what you are saying defies logic and common sense. Don't stretch your link chains beyond value.

5. Common sense arguments are valuable. Simply turning repeatedly to "my source vs. their source" after the constructive probably isn't going to win the day for you with me. I prefer that you use reasoning to show me how your argument works and apply real understanding of the topic.

7. Be polite to each other. Pay attention to this advice during cross-fire in particular. Avoid speaking over each other, not answering questions, being condescending, or taking too much time on your point.

Good luck and have fun!

I am new to judging, so please speak at a conversational pace. Time yourselves and give me a clear reason to vote for you.

Hi! I am currently a junior at Lexington High School and have been competing for the past three years in Public Forum debate. I will be a flow judge. Here are a few things I would like to see:

1) Do not read cases too fast, if I miss something in case it will only hurt you!

2) Please extend contentions and links throughout all speeches

3) Interact with your opponents' responses-- too much card reading is often unnecessary.

4) provide a speech timeline before speeches

5) In final focus, tell me why I would be voting for your side of the debate.

6) If you see that your opponent is bringing up new evidence or new responses in summary speeches, or something was left unresponded to: BRING IT UP!

I am a current Public Forum debater, and I am a flow judge, which means I am tech over truth. Address all your points cohesively, and you need to weigh. If you have a framework, make sure to carry it through the entire round and not just drop it mid-round. Throughout your speeches, make sure you are giving me valid/important reasons to vote for you.

Rebuttal: If you have a framework, establish it and carry it on towards your speech. Make sure to signpost and indicate which point you are countering/talking about. Make sure to not drop anything and be detailed/provide valid reasoning. If you're the first rebuttal speaker, focus on refuting and wrapping up at the end. If you're the second rebuttal speaker, I prefer you frontline first, and then move on to refuting (but, of course you can switch around depending on your preference). Also, remember to go down the flow effectively. PLEASE DO NOT BRING UP NEW CONTENTIONS DURING REBUTTAL.

Summary: Again, establish your framework. If you're the first summary speaker, make sure to frontline, extend yours and your opponent's cases, and WEIGH! If you're the second summary speaker, make sure to backline instead of front-lining and follow the usual format. DO NOT BRING UP COMPLETELY NEW ARGUMENTS AT THIS TIME OF THE ROUND (it doesn't make sense).

Final Focus: Make sure to mention your framework if you have one (lol saying it again!). The most important thing in this speech is to weigh effectively and address any remaining points. But, weigh! NO NEW INFORMATION DURING FINAL FOCUS.

Cross-Fire: Make sure to be respectful and not talk over each other. I like it when there's a clash, but just remember that I will not be noting anything from crossfire down, so anything valid said during crossfire can be brought up into later speeches. If you're calling a card, just remember that the time you spend reading your opponent's card is going to be subtracted from your prep time.

Speed: It does not matter how fast you speak, just be clear and cohesive (like I have to understand you lol).

Evidence: No anecdotes. Cut cards which contain factual information!

Just remember that you are not allowed to add new information to your speeches starting from second summary and onwards. Also, make sure to collapse on important points during the round.

Also, make sure you are being respectful towards your opponents. If you are being racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamaphobic, or in any way being discriminatory, you will be dropped from the round.

Lastly, just have fun and good luck!

I am a parent judge. Please limit debate jargon; would seek a reasonable rate of speech and see lots of value in providing a road map. Be concise.

I have been judging speech and PF in both Novice and Varsity in tabroom and local tournaments in past few years.

Here are a few important aspects of speech and debate that are crucial in my mind:

1. Respect to your opponents
2. Speak slowly and clearly (I will stop taking notes if you talk too fast)
3. Avoid Debater Language
4. Do not speak over one another
5. I will give you a few seconds of leeway, but don't abuse it
6. Know your audience

Thanks

-Sandy Hou

Hey! I’m a first year out of speech and debate, and I competed in Extemp and Congress for all four years of high school.

For speaking events, I’m looking for a clear, logical, and interesting speech. In Extemp, make sure you ANSWER THE QUESTION! Be conversational; talk to me, not at me. For interp events, I want to be able to follow along easily, be entertained, and be interested.

For debate, be clear, don't speak too fast, and SIGNPOST! Extend your arguments/evidence throughout the round, and please state and weigh your voters at the end of the round.

Good luck everyone!

I debated PF for 4 years at Acton Boxborough from 2015-2019 and am currently a senior in college. Idk how this activity has changed since I've been there.

General:

• Don't spread, but other than that I can follow
• Don't run random progressive arguments like theory and Ks -- that's not the point of PF debate and I'm not gonna care enough to judge them
• I can judge flow and lay, depending on how the round goes.

Dos:

• be nice to your opponents
• warrant your arguments
• clearly extend your arguments throughout all speeches -- I dont want random arguments being brought up for the first or second time in final focus
• collapse and weigh in later speeches
• I don't really care about frontlining in second rebuttal, do it if you want -- it can only help

Donts:

• be mean during crossfire, or in the round in general for that matter
• extend through ink (ignoring responses to your arguments and extending anyways
• be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc -- auto L

If you don't turn the round into a mess, I'll be generally lenient with speaker points.

I did public forum for 4 years in high school and I coached for 2 years. That being said, I'm now 4 years out from high school so my flowing isn't quite as fast as it used to be. Do with that information what you will.

Otherwise my paradigm is pretty simple:

The most important thing is that I will always choose the easiest/cleanest path to the ballot. 

Terminal defense does NOT have to be in first summary.

I like weighing. Judging is super hard when I have a bunch of arguments on both sides with no way to analyze them and if I'm feeling rushed I might analyze them wrong on my own. So do it for me.

Don't trust my facial expressions. You can say the best argument I've ever heard and I'll still look bored.

Don't be rude in round. I know the difference between aggressive and mean, and I'm not afraid to dock points if I see the latter.

If you have any questions feel free to ask before the round.

I used to have something on here saying "strike me if you're gonna run theory", however; it would seem that they have become so pervasive in debate that everyone would have to strike me. So now I will just say: I barely understand how progressive arguments work, I have no understanding of the rules behind them, and I really really REALLY prefer arguments that stick to the topic. So like I said at the beginning, do with that information what you will. 

As a lay judge, I expect debaters to enunciate and argue clearly and persuasively. This is my second time, so please speak slowly. No spreading please.

I have little experience in judging, so I expect students to deliver a sound argument based on the given topic.

I am a university professor who teaches literature and film. I expect my students to write persuasively and articulate their thoughts in class. Thus, I expect the same from these debaters.

Parent judge, prefer well developed arguments with good logic.

Please keep the debate at a conversational speed.

Whilst I will do my best to take notes, I do appreciate sound logic and constructive evidence.

Please respect your opponents and keep speeches and crossfire civil.

Most importantly, remember to have fun!

As a judge, I prefer for debates to stay on resolution/topic, does that mean I am more traditional, yes. The formats were formed for a reason and that should be followed. As for speed, can flow very well, however, if it sounds like you are choking and cannot breathe, well you just dropped those contentions, cards, points, or whatever you were trying to establish. In most things, quality outweighs quantity, like do you attend three, four, or five colleges at once, no, no you do not do that, you pick the one of the highest quality and focus on that, so in that vein, remember, this is not policy, but either PF or LD and looking for quality during the rounds.

Please respect each other and have a great debate.

I am a new and relatively inexperienced judge. This is 1st tournament in which I am a judge.

It is expected that teams are respectful to each with words and body language. You will be penalized if your words or demeanor is dismissive to your opponent.

Please do not use debate jargon or terminology that a layperson may not understand. I will need time to go over my notes so I will not be announcing the winner and likely not provide feedback at the end of the round.

Hi!! I did PF in high school, currently a junior in college. Here are some of my preferences/things I like to see in rounds:

1. If you want me to vote on an argument, explain it clearly in summary and final focus.

2. Frontlining in second rebuttal. If you're the second speaking team, defend any arguments you want to extend in second rebuttal.

3. Collapse! Please don't extend more than 1 (maybe 2) argument in summary. It's better to clearly explain 1 contention than speed through 3.

4. Weigh! Tell me why your argument is more important than your opponents'.

5. Be nice in cross! Please don't interrupt or talk over your opponents. If you do, I'll drop speaks. I'm not flowing cross, so if something important happens that you want me to consider, tell me in a speech.

I'll flow the round– please make sure to explain everything clearly, collapse, and weigh

Most importantly, please be nice and have fun!

I have no prior experience in speech and debate. I have never competed and only recently started judging. I understand basic debate argumentation but am still learning specific jargon and technicalities. Please try not to speak too fast but I understand that this is a space that requires time constraints. I want to hear any kind of arguments that you have prepared. Please clearly extend your arguments throughout the round, with author names or taglines so I know exactly what you’re extending. I am excited to see what all of you have to say, but please be respectful of each other in round.

Hi, my name is Krish Mehta! I am a current senior at The Lawrenceville School and I have been debating since my freshman year (20+ competitions).

Notes:

1) Don't discriminate. Please.

2) Don't spread (+240 wpm).

3) You should frontline offense and weigh in 2nd rebuttal. No need to extend conceded defense in 1st summary.

4) No yelling or screaming, I would prefer a relaxed round.

5) I will be a flow judge unless both sides request that this becomes a lay round at which I will vote on who convinced me more.

6) I do not flow cross, odds are I will be on my phone

7) Signpost

8) Tech > Truth

9) Unless there is true abuse in the round, I will not evaluate theory.

For high speaks:

1) Come in with a pickup line I laugh at

2) Come in playing good music (bad music will be less speaks)

3) No screaming in round

4) Use Drake lyrics in your constructive

5) Don't Spread

6) Humor in round (at the right times)

I debated PF for Poly Prep (Graduated in 2021) and was relatively successful on the national circuit. Was a pretty typical tech debater (back in like...2020) and am a pretty typical tech/tab judge. If you extend each part of an argument through every speech, warrant throughout the round, and prove to me that you outweigh your opponent, you will win. Please add me to the email chain: abigail@reichmeyer.com

*NOVICES: Extensions are absolutely paramount to me. If you are going to do anything at all in summary and final focus, extend and warrant every part of the argument you are going for.

Some preferences:

1. Please collapse, preferably on one link and one impact. Write my ballot for me in final focus. Start weighing early and spend time on it.
2. You must frontline at least the argument you are going for in second rebuttal; no new responses in second summary to arguments made in first rebuttal. Not worth it to try going new in the two because I will know and not flow it
3. You should cut cards and not paraphrase in case. I’m unlikely to look at/call for evidence unless I am told to, but I am going to scrutinize your evidence more if you paraphrase. Really low threshold for misrepresenting evidence at this point
4. I don’t mind an intense round, but please don’t be a jerk we will all be uncomfortable
5. I have a lot of thoughts about progressive argumentation in PF but TLDR is I am comfortable evaluating in a technical sense but you should 1) really know what you are doing and 2) it often puts me in a position where I have to intervene, because I don’t think it is ethical to give you a W for making arguments that are not the norm in PF in a round where your opponents are out of their depth. Thus, I have to decide my threshold for responses in a way I don’t in typical case debates which is necessarily interventionist
6. I will do absolutely everything short of intervening to avoid presuming, but I presume whatever side is the squo (usually neg)
7. I will probably not write a super detailed RFD but I will give you a comprehensive oral one, so feel free to record that.

Cliche, but have fun. My biggest regret after debate went online my junior year was not savoring the time I had at in person tournaments. Remember that this is supposed to be enjoyable!

Rhetoric and speaking style are critical to me. Debate is not a competition of research, it is about persuasively articulating an argument. Poised speaking style, developed rhetoric and persuasive metaphors will gain points with me. Avoid debate jargon and technical language.

I'm a Latin teacher at the Haverford School. I participated in and coached CX debate, but this is my first tournament in years. I think I'm pretty flexible as a judge; feel free to ask any clarifying questions.

1) Moderate speed and moderately progressive arguments are fine (CX is great but this isn't CX).

2) Arguments that are clearly extended across the flow and have explicitly-articulated impacts win rounds.

3) Argumentation >>> presentation

I'm a parent volunteer judge. I did parliamentary debate in Ireland in the late 1980s — in other words, I know little about contemporary American PF jargon. I've been listening, and I've read the paradigms of fellow judges who have deep and recent PF experience and I'm slowly learning from them! Learning on the job, from judging, from talking to coaches and from talking to my daughter who debates.

So what do I understand? I want to understand you! Speak slowly, I want to follow your argument, and I want to feel like you're having a powerfully felt conversation with your opponents and with me. Don't talk at me, talk with me. Use tone intentionally. I'm your kind but slightly cranky uncle at the Thanksgiving table, you want to persuade me. You can use warmth and humor, as well as clarity and ruthlessness. Give me facts, but give me a point of view.

Lastly, and above all. Listen to your opponent. Really truly listen to them. Don’t talk over each other, but also don’t take a minute to ask your “question”—“don’t take up cross.” Try to understand the very heart of their argument. If you "block" the heart of their argument, you are more likely to win than five little nitpicks. (Yes, I'm learning, I know what "block" means, and heart of the argument is another way, perhaps, of "weighing"—the heart weighs more than five nitpicks..)

One last thing—my day job is as an executive and leadership coach. In that capacity I work a lot with leaders of large organizations, often helping with public speaking and executive presence. Show leadership, gravitas, charisma and presence out there!

Truly the last thing: a debater told me I should say, Truth over tech. Though her coach pointed out that’d be pretty obvious from the above.

Hi! For my public forum competitors, I ask only three things. One: please do not spread. I understand that this format requires that you get out a lot of information in a short period of time, but please try to keep it comprehensible. Second, please always keep it civil. Third, please stay on the resolution provided. I accept both frameworks and off-time road maps.

I'm a Junior, and I've debated pf for a couple of years so I'm a flow judge.

Tech > Truth

Cards are great but I'll probably prefer warranting over cards without warranting.

Please comparatively weigh. Tell me why your impact is better than your opponents.

EXTEND AND SIGNPOST

You have to extend your argument in summary or ff otherwise I won't take it.

I'm okay with speed but don't spread

I'll listen to cross (maybe) but bring it up in a speech if it's important.

Do not misconstrue evidence

If a card is very very very contested I might call for it otherwise I won't

I don't love progressive arguments (theory, k's, etc.)

And obviously be respectful, no yelling, and absolutely do not be racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic, ableist, etc.

Have Fun!

I am a Social Studies teacher who has judged a handful of tournaments over the past year. I look forward to judging novice level this tournament.

While I am comfortable with a medium speaking rate, please help me out by not speaking overly fast. I'll take flow for the round noting arguments and note-worthy evidence. I'm looking to be persuaded by well-reasoned arguments and a speaker's unique style. I'm hoping to hear strong analysis (link) of the evidence in support of your claims.

Arguments that have successfully persuaded me in the past are those supported by sound and credible evidence, used skillful questioning to counter-argue the opposing argument, and maintained links throughout the rounds.

Please maintain respect throughout the debate.

I am currently a senior in college. I am a novice judge and I have never competed in debate. I have some experience in mock trial, so I appreciate logical argumentation that is clear and fully explained. If I can't understand you I won't vote for you.

IF YOU ARE READING THIS, THAT MEANS I AM (PROBABLY) YOUR JUDGE. YIPEE!!

*:・ﾟ ₍ᐢ•ﻌ•ᐢ₎*:・ﾟ

HE/SHE/HIM/HER

D.K.SEEP@GMAIL.COM

BACKGROUND: Debated for four years for Horizon High School in Arizona, graduated 2019 and now I judge for Collegiate Academy in New York. I mostly ran performance/queer rage Ks in high school, if that matters to anybody reading.

CRASH COURSE: The floor is truly yours, run whatever you like I want to hear it!! Please explain your complicated lit, I really hate having to read a bunch of fine print in order to judge the round.Oh my gosh please please please use speechdrop.net I ABSOLUTELY DESPISE EMAIL CHAINS THEY TAKE SO STINKIN' LONG. STOP. I am fine with spreading, but please pause and emphasize important bits of your speeches. Card tags/authors, impacts, links, anything that you think NEEDS to be on my flow, take .5 seconds to pause and emphasize. Even raising your voice helps if you dont have the time to pause, it really helps me out on my flow. WEIGH WEIGH WEIGH, IMPACT ANALYSIS IS KEEEEYYY to winning my ballot! Also please extend, otherwise I will LITERALLY drop anything you did not extend by the end of the round.

PF: I never really was a PF person, so it's hard to say what I like to see in a PF debate. My big thing is impact analysis, I don't really care for "my evidence is better than YOUR evidence" debates. I feel like a lot of PF debates focus too much on things that don't really affect /my/ ballot (how recent your evidence is, statistics, etc.) which I personally don't like, but I also know thats just part of the event.

FRAMEWORK: I love me some good framework debate. If you're running traditional I think you should REALLY focus in on framework.Please, add some extra meat to your framework beyond "value: [BLANK], criterion: [blank],"I want to know why you chose your framework and how it fits into the round before you even get into contentions.

LINKS: To me, anything is a link. And Imean anything.You tell me it links, and I'll believe you.That is not the same for delinking, please tell me why a link is BS and I will believe you.Too many debaters have simply tried to tell me "this doesn't link, drop the argument," without telling mewhyit doesn't link.

IMPACTS: You need to really hammer in why your impacts win the round!! EVEN WITH EXTINCTION IMPACTS, TELL MEWHY IT MATTERS.YOU CANNOT JUST GIVE ME EXTINCTION IMPACTS AND EXPECT ME TO VOTE FOR YOU WITHOUT DOING THE PROPER WEIGHING!! Magnitude, scope, whatever,weigh. all. of. the. impacts. in. round.

PLANS/COUNTERPLANS: I'm lukewarm on plans, I think if you're gonna run a plan it should be very fleshed out otherwise why not just run a trad aff lol? Counterplans are cool too, but please just let me know when you ARE running a counterplan. Obviously plans and counterplans can be run as trad, but it's just to help me flow and keep track of what is being said, thank you!

KRITIKS: My faaaavooritteeeeee!!! I love em all!However, I have not competed in almost 5 years(ohgeezthatscrazyimgettingold)and I am NOT college edumacated. Please explain your lit!Add some extra analytics after cards, something, anything like that. I have a pretty good understanding of a lot of phil, but I just need my hand held a little bit.Also if your opponent clearly is confused, PLEASE DO NOT CONFUSE THEM MORE BY NOT EXPLAINING THINGS.That is really, really mean and I do not like it ONE BIT.This is why I encourage flex prep, let your opponent ask clarification questions and answer themHONESTLY.Oh and also please LABEL each section of the K!! Makes it a lot easier for me as a judge.

THEORY: Personally, I am not super big on theory. I like that debate doesn't have any rules, why argue about made up rules? Either way, I encourage theory, but please make the violation very very clear to me. AND PLEASE MAKE IT A WELL FLESHED OUT THEORY SHELL. IF I HAVE TO MAKE AN ENTIRE NEW FLOW FOR THEORY JUST FOR YOU TO SPEND 15 SECONDS ON IT I WILL BE SO MADD!!! Basically, if you are trying to win my ballot, do not think that a theory shell will do it.

TOPICALITY: I personally don't see why ANYBODY has to be topical in LD, so please please give me some clear impacts. Again, I'm willing to listen to it, but you really need some good impacts for me to vote on it.

DISCLOSURE: Same for above, I NEED a valid violation for disclosure especially. I think a lot of disclosure theory is very frivolous, so please flesh out your shell if you're going to run it in front of me.

PERFORMANCE: I love performance in debate. I come from a theatre background, so if you've always wanted to run performance and you've never done it before, I am the perfect judge to do it front of.Please do not drop your performance after your first speech because I will be so sad):

SPEAKER POINTS: Much to tabroom's dismay, I am not a fan of speaker points. It is my least favorite part of judging I hate having to give a number value to your speaking ability I think it is kind of dumb and doesn't make any sense in a debate setting. I'll almost always give pretty high speaks, unless you're like crazy offensive or something.

Well, that is basically everything I can think of. I encourage all debaters to have fun, debate is a really stressful activity and you all need to remember to prioritize yourselves and your own mental wellbeing. Please feel free to email me with ANY questions that you have before AND after the round! I am always happy to answer any questions and provide extra feedback as needed.

If you are still reading, pet this cat!

＿＿
　　　　　✿＞　　フ
　　　　　| 　_　 _ l
　 　　　／` ミ＿xノ
　　 　 /　　　 　 |
　　　 /　 ヽ　　 ﾉ
　 　 │　　|　|　|
　／￣|　　 |　|　|
　| (￣ヽ＿_ヽ_)__)
　＼二つ

Style: Focus strictly on debate logic and which points were addressed

Preferences: Prefer debaters do not speak extremely fast, I want to be able to understand everything being said (and I want your opponents to understand you as well).

I did PF in high school! Here are some things I like to see in a round:

1. Pretty extensions. If you want me to vote on an argument, re-explain it in summary and final focus.

2. Frontlining in second rebuttal. If you want me to vote on one of your contentions, you should defend it in second rebuttal.

3. Collapsing. It's better to pick and clearly explain 1 of your contentions than speed through 3.

4. Weighing. Tell me why your argument is more important than your opponents'.

5. A friendly crossfire. Please don't interrupt or talk over your opponent in cross. I probably won't pay attention to crossfire, but if people are being mean I'll drop speaks.

I'm not super familiar with progressive arguments (k, theory, etc.), so if you do run them please explain them well.

Feel free to ask me any questions before the round!

P.S. if you do a TikTok dance/make a TikTok reference you'll get +.5 speaks

TL;DR: Don't spread, for the love of god signpost, i agree very much with the wise Krutin Devesh, weigh WELL (metaweigh if possible), make the debate interesting. Table totes prohibited.

Me: I'm a junior with 4 years of PF experience. I've been to several National Circuit tournaments and have won a few local ones. As I am a flow debater, I would consider myself a flow judge.

Speed: Speak as fast as you would like as long as you aren't spreading. Take that to LD or some other form of debate where spreading is welcome. If you spread I'll still be able to understand it but I'll dock your speaks to a 25.

Signposting: Hopefully the following reminder should only apply to novices - PLEASE SIGNPOST! In the words of my favorite debater, Dorothea Newman, signpost so much that I feel like I'm driving in a construction zone. My biggest pet peeve is not signposting. I also appreciate numbered responses and if you do this I'll probably give you decently high speaks. I will subtract -1 speaks if you fail to ever signpost in the round.

Weighing: Make sure to do a good job weighing, I would rather vote off of who does a better job weighing than my own personal view of impacts. Additionally - you can't just say "we win off of probability and magnitude (insert other weighing buzzwords)", you must tell me why your argument is more probable/has a greater magnitude. Something I appreciate that will bump your speaks: metaweighing. This is a relatively new idea in PF but it essentially means to weigh your weighing mechanisms (explain why probability is the most important weighing factor instead of magnitude, etc.)

Reasons for drops: I can and will drop you if you are racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist, ableist, etc. Xoxo.

Extra: Make the debate interesting!! Don't just read in a monotone. Make cx lively (I don't flow it or weigh it in round at all but I do listen). A pet peeve of mine - making statement questions in crossfire. Such questions include "[insert evidence] so what do you think of that", "are you aware...", "isn't it true that...", etc. These questions are a waste of time and please try to come up with a more creative way to bring up your points.

Anyway, good luck and you're welcome to postround me if you so desire.

Hey guys! I'm Solai Solaiyappan and I'm a Senior at Lexington High school and I've debated PF for 4 years.

I have a few things that i'm picky about.

1) Don't Spread (Speed reading) during any speech and speak CLEARLY.

2) No K's and theory and anything that is not PF.

3) Pls weigh. Weighing is very important and if you don't weigh I won't really know what your impacts are at the end of the round.

4) Try and go down the flow. This is a pretty hard thing to do but it is very rewarding because every judge can follow you and comprehend your points.

5) Do not be mean in cross. If you see that your opponent is struggling please do not bombard them with questions. Let them have time and let them try and respond. If I feel like you are being mean I will dock speaker points. The max I'll deduct is 3 points.

6) If your opponent dropped a contention or point that is important in the round don't just say it. Explain why it is important that they dropped it.

7) Same with extending points. Don't say "extend the johnson 18 card". Extend it and explain what the card is briefly.

Also, I'm fine with complex language as long as it doesn't go overboard. If it does I will ask you to explain after your speech. I really want to express my concern about spreading because when you spread I won't be able to catch all your points. I want you guys to focus on diction. Try and have fun y'all.

P.S. I'm a pretty chill person and I will be giving y'all good speaks as long as y'all don't say anything racist or mean.

Hi!

My name's Sruthi, and I'm a senior at the University of Pennsylvania, studying cognitive science! I competed in Varsity LD for four years in high school, and I also did original oratory for that period of time as well. Admittedly, though, it's been a while since I've gotten into it, so I'll ask that you guys don't spread (talking fast normally is fine) and be as concise as possible, the latter of which is just a general point to use in all of your rounds (especially for LD, which tends to get abstract). I'll also note that I'm unfamiliar with the current debate topic, so try not to be too jargon-y.

Looking forward to seeing you guys in round!

This is my first time judging Public Forum. Please focus on making clear arguments with sound evidence, rather than technicalities.