Arizona State HDSHC Invitational
2023 — Tempe, AZ/US
Novice Lincoln-Douglas Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideI am a former speech competitor of 3 years with no experience competing in or judging debate. I competed in INFO primarily and thus am only used to conversational delivery. I will factor delivery into speaker points alone and will not vote against a competitor for delivering at a reasonably rapid speed, so long as it does not prevent me from understanding what they are saying.
I will look for achievable and impactful frameworks supported by specific, relevant evidence, warranting, and clear analysis and will be taking limited notes during round -- limited so I can focus my attention and engagement on the round. I prefer empirical evidence and prefer a few well developed arguments over a higher quantity.
I will not tolerate disrespect during round. Be a good competitor.
Hello! I'm Zach Badain. I am a varsity Lincoln Douglass debater for 3 years at The Meadows School. I have a lot of experience judging novice.
I look for clear, concise arguments backed up by cards, and not just throwing a lot of information and seeing what sticks. I am not a big fan of spreading but will not count it towards or against your speaker points. If you are running against plans ensure that disads are well defined. I dislike bad theory and bad arguments and anything offensive. I am not super critical on speaker points as long as you don't stutter or stumble too much, but if you do want to earn good speaks confidence is key, and speak with inflection and purpose.
You don't need to include me on the email chain as I won't be reading along anyways.
Hello, I am a former Debater I love LD and PF. I did debate for 3 years and attended SWSDI at ASU and take that information as you please :) I am lay debater who will be flowing the round. I am okay with Counter Plans and Plans as long as you are able to support them throughout your case. I am Okay with K's and progressive I just do not prefer it and if you want the best feedback I would try to run Lay. I love a good Value and Value Criterion Debate although I do not want that to be the only thing you talk about during the entire debate. I do not vote on who I think is a better speaker I vote based off who I feel is a better Debater. A great debater is able to flow all arguments and evidences through the entire round,. I also do no not like arguments from the negation saying that affirmation is non topical if they have a unique plan there’s nothing wrong with that and I do buy any of those argument saying it’s unfair. I just want you to do what you need to have a successful round.
Can you please send your cases to this email. Belchf1@unlv.nevada.edu
:)
Hello. My name is Brinley Belding and I will be judging you. I am a senior in high school and have been debating for three years. I am fine with spreading as long as you share your cases with me. I like a good, creative theory arg, but make sure it makes sense. To get good speak from me, please be articulate and try not to drop arguments. Or, I will take $3 a speaker point. Avoid running ks. Thank you.
Hi, I’m Frederick and I debated in both Public Forum and Congress for three years. State champ PF, went to nats in Congress.
Email: fchangho@asu.edu
Overall, pretty standard tech.
The easiest way to win my ballot is by having clear warranting throughout the debate. Evidence is great and all, but please have reasoning for WHY that evidence matters in the round. You need to be able to explain the logical progression in your link chains every time you mention your arguments. Don’t say NYT 19 and move on and expect me to go along with it.
Weigh. But make sure your link chain is intact and you’ve made clear extensions through the round.
Signposting is good. Organization is important.
If you get a concession in cross, bring it up in speech.
When possible, frontline in rebuttals.
No prep time for card reading is okay, but don’t take too long to pull up a card for your opponent to read. If there are card issues that you want me to look at, tell me to call for them too in speech. I will choose to view them at my discretion.
NO SPREADING.
Don’t be a jerk to your opponents. If I need to intervene b/c someone’s consistently talking over another in cross, you’ll be on pretty thin ice. Watch your own time. Watch your opponents’ time. Don’t talk during others’ speeches or make any rude gestures.
Off-time roadmaps are okay, but you don’t need to tell me what you’re doing in your first rebuttal for example.
Clash. Address opp’s arguments and explain to me how yours interact with theirs + why yours are better. Simple way to win.
PF-specific
PF’s intent is to be accessible to the average Joe. Don’t do anything that hinders that.
Generally tech>truth, but please don’t pull up with some nuke war argument that vaguely relates or anything else that requires a significantly unlikely chain of events.
I would rather vote for a well-warranted argument without an impact over a poorly-warranted one with a good impact.
Key voters are great for staying organized, but if you choose to do line-by-line just remember to signpost exceptionally well.
I don’t pay attention during cross. Unless something blatantly wrong happens.
LD-specific
Before I ever judged LD, I had only ever seen 3 LD debates. I’ll be able to follow along with your arguments, but progressive will be relatively difficult for me to evaluate in the scope of the round unless your warranting is pristine (which it should be anyway). Disads, CPs make the most sense to me. Topicality shells and K’s, somewhat. High risk, low reward if you run theory.
I will be considering based on quality over quantity arguments and prefer a conversational pace and the avoidance of overly technical debate jargon.
-
Conversational pace: A good pace for a conversation is one that allows for all participants to comfortably express their ideas and thoughts, while also engaging in active listening and responding to one another.
-
Quality over quantity arguments: It is important that arguments are well-reasoned and supported by evidence, rather than simply being lengthy or repetitive. I will consider the depth and thoughtfulness of the arguments presented, rather than the quantity.
-
Avoidance of debate jargon: Using jargon or specialized language can create barriers to understanding and hinder effective communication.
Overall, I will consider the balance and flow of the conversation, and how well the participants are able to effectively communicate and engage with one another in a respectful and constructive manner.
Public Forum:
I flow the rounds and judge based on your speeches not cross fire. I review notes, contentions that flow from beginning to end. Please make sure to have definitions and framework. Framework is very important to your case. Make sure you are clear in your contentions and arguments. If I cannot understand you or you are talking too fast, I miss things and it can be a problem. You are there to convince me why your team wins-explain the impacts and weighing, FRAMEWORK and explain the reason for decision. Pretend I do not know anything about the topic. Be respectful of your opponents and let them talk during cross fire. You should be able to provide your cards, evidence quickly. You should be organized and have them quickly to provide competitor if asked. I will reject any extinction impacts. I will look at climate change and increasing threat of war, but the huge numbers used will not be counted. I do like when teams collapse to one or two best contentions and not the laundry list. Give me the impacts, weighing and why you win.
LD
LD is a speech form of debate and I need to understand your case and reasoning. Spreading is very common today, but it does not mean you are an excellent debater, logical or can convince someone to your side of the argument. You need to convince me, your contentions, framework and the reasons why you won the round. I will flow the rounds and judge based on your speeches not cross fire. I review notes, contentions that flow from beginning to end. Please make sure to have definitions, values and criterion. Make sure you are clear in your contentions, definitions and arguments. If I cannot understand you or you are talking too fast, I miss things and it can be a problem for you. You are there to convince me why you win-explain the impacts, logic, reasoning explain the reason for decision. Pretend I do not know anything about the topic. Debate the resolution and topic. Some LD topics are more like PF but keep to the resolution. Plans and counterplans need to fit the resolution and debaters need to keep to the resolution.
Congress:
Make sure to advance the debate and there are differences betwen first, middle and ending speeches. Do not use debate lingo as please affirm is not done in Congressional debate. Do not use computers and read your notes. Make sure you have credible sources and know your topic. Be able to debate both sides of the topic. Two good/great speeches are better than 3 average/poor speeches so in other words, less can be more. I want you to particpate but quality is very important. You are there to persuade the members.
IE:
Impromptu: Biggest ranking is did you answer the question or prompt. Do you understand what is being asked. Make sure you are organized, confident and always each reason/point relates to the prompt.
Extemporaneous. Use good sources of material. Economic would be The Economist, Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times. New York Times is better than Arizona Republic but make sure you have good credible research. The topics are very advanced and in many cases specific so answer the question. You are to use persuation and logic, with your sources to convince me the answer-keep to the question.
I am a Varsity Lincoln Douglas Debater from Las Vegas. I enjoy judging debates and love hearing new arguments from different perspectives.
I don't love stupid theory arguments or K's but will hear them out if you want to run it
I personally do not mind considering abstract arguments as long as you can provide warrants and reasonable explanations. Maintaining a nice flow in your speeches and following your "road maps" would make it easier for me to flow your speeches.
I also appreciate good humor or any creativity in your speeches.
Please talk clearly, I don't mind if debaters spread but if I cannot understand what you're saying, then your points will not be recorded.
I will give extra speaker points if you bring me an iced caramel macchiato
My email is andrewlvds@gmail.com
I am a parent judge. I very much prefer the traditional debate format and appreciate clear and concise arguments. I also find roadmaps and guidelines very helpful.
Spreading: I find it challenging to follow arguments presented via spreading. I do, however, understand that spreading is sometimes necessary, like, e.g., when rebutting a long list of contentions. I will read the speech document to assist my understanding of the argument but am of the opinion that it is contingent on the debater to make clear and compelling arguments during the debate.
Cards/references: I most appreciate debaters citing peer-reviewed publications, less so for media publications. I'm grateful of the debaters who clearly state the legitimacy of their references or the unreliability of their opponent's references.
Hello,
I have competed in Lincoln Douglass for 2 years during highschool. I currently still often engage in Lincoln Douglass debating at ASU where I attend. I would consider myself a tech judge. However, in order to truly gauge your performance and debating capabilities. I will purposely refrain from flowing any rounds. The purpose of this is in order to be able to fully engage myself in what you and your opponent has to say, to be able to be attentive to good solid logical progressions, proper line of reasoning, and most importantly your ability to properly keep track of your arguments and recall arguments which have gone in your favor, I will refrain myself from flowing. If this is a problem I sincerely apologize, however I can assure you with the utmost certainty that I am not a novice when it comes to debating. I will not be disclosing any of the rounds I judge, sorry.
No spreading. I am a parent judge and prefer Traditional debates. If I can't understand what you are saying, I won't consider those arguments. Don't add me to email chains.
I won't time you, please time each other. You can complete your sentence once time runs out, anything new will be dropped. I will deduct 0.5 speaker points for bad time management.
I prefer evidence based facts from credible sources over individual author opinions or emotional appeals. While I do consider logic in decisioning, those arguments needs to be well supported.
While I consider cross ex in my judging, make sure you address anything significant in your subsequent case or rebuttal. Otherwise I will drop those from Judging consideration.
Speaker points: I score in increments of 0.5.
General rule of thumb: One of the best debaters: 30 points; Above average: 29 points; Average debater: 28 points; Below average: 27 points
Excessive Spreading: 25 points; Offensive or outrageous: 20 points.
Hey! I'm Leighton Liu. I am a varsity debater for The Meadows School.
I expect both debaters to be polite and respectful to each other and have a clean fair debate.
Other than that, I will listen to most arguments as long as the evidence and explanation is sufficient. Please do not run theory.
Put me in the email chain, my email is ll856@icloud.com
I did policy debate for three years in high school, but I am not doing college debate so I am not familiar with the topic. I am ok with Kritiks, but please explain VERY thoroughly. I am ok with speed in the constructive speeches, but in the later rebuttal speeches, I would like for you to slow down so I can flow easier. I would also like to be included in the email chain, my email is teresanguyen143124@gmail.com
My name is Sujatha.
I am a first time judge for Policy debate. My judging will be based on logical approach and impacts presented in the round.
I ask that you speak with strong confidence and with clarity. As for speed, I ask you to speak at a conversation pace.
Be respetful during your rounds and act kindly.
Good luck
Updated 11/1/24 for Mountain View
For OUTSTANDING advice that reflects my expectations for all events, click on Mr. Jim Welty's comprehensive and on point paradigm. His last comment regarding Congressional debate is a gem.
https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?judge_person_id=176980
Congress
PO begins the session ranked 1.
This is a great and fun event and I do not mean to be negative, BUT:
- Never Break Cycle
- Do not read a speech
- Extend argumentation, do not repeat previous argumentation
- Experienced debaters please PO
Click here for elaboration
Debate
I am a community/parent judge and do not understand nor do I want to understand debate theory. Moreover, you know far more about this topic than I (at least I hope so) so you need to be clear, simple and direct in analysis.
No spreading (I always ballot for the slowest speaking debater). I also always ballot for the debater who collapses in their final speech. Why - click here.
Warranting > evidence
truth > tech,
simple > complex
less > more
No progressive or critique.
NEVER run the flow,
collapse and weigh
LD and PF please click through and skim the detailed paradigm you will find there as my preferences will be reflected in my rankings. Ethical use of evidence!!!
LD - this is values debate so focus your time on a clear definition of value and rational for why affirming or negating the resolution will achieve that value AND a side by side comparison of value an simple reason to prefer your value position. Collapse in 3AR and last 3 minutes of 2NR to the single argument you want me to vote on and WEIGH THE ROUND.
PF - collapse in summaryto a single voter and weigh in final focus.
Click on Frederick Changho paradigm for a clear set of expectations I support and share. Click on Scott Wood's paradigm for another paradigm that reflects my expectations, particularly good v bad form.
I strongly urge you to click here for more. Did I mention, no spreading? This is the most oft ignored expectation and remember I always ballot for the debater who speaks the slowest!
Speech/Interp
I value a logical narrative over citation and authenticity in performance over technique.
For further detail click here.
More importantly, for OUTSTANDING advice that reflects my expectations for all speech, click on Mr. Jim Welty's comprehensive and on point paradigm.
https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?judge_person_id=176980
No spreading. I look for clear and concise arguments backed with evidence.
Haaaaaaiiiii<3333 (づ。◕‿‿◕。)づ
My name is Oliver Song. I'm a varsity debater at The Meadows School. I'm not super picky but there are things I WON'T VOTE FOR.
I do not like spreading!! Sorry! ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ
I will never NEVER, vote on RVIs. Never again. If you say the words "RVI" I will sit and stare at you with a disappointed face and write down nothing on my flow.
Please be nice !!!!! (✿◠‿◠)
Other than that the usuals. Have a clean fair debate. Keep in mind humor can sway me. Be respectful of your opponent. I will listen to almost any argument as long as you have adequate evidence and explanation
Lets all have fun and debate LIKE A BOSS! (⌐■_■)
Hi,
I'm Symphony Wang, a Senior Varsity Lincoln Douglas Debater from Las Vegas. I enjoy judging debates and love hearing new arguments from different perspectives. I personally do not mind considering abstract arguments as long as you can provide warrants and reasonable explanations. Maintaining a nice flow in your speeches and following your "road maps" would make it easier for me, and I would enjoy your speeches more. Finally, please keep in mind that we are a respective community, treat your opponents, and judges how you want to be treated!
Please talk clearly, I don't mind if debaters spread but if I cannot understand what you're saying, then your points will not be recorded.
Stay enthusiastic and have fun! :)
I competed in speech and debate in high school mainly competing in congress but tried a couple other events as well. When judging congress, clash is important to me, I want to hear rebuttal in your speech. I don’t like canned speeches, I want to hear you responding to arguments. It’s important to me that everyone plays fairly as well and is respectful to their opponents.