SADL Debate Tournament 3
2023 — New York, NY/US
HS Judges Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideHarvard '28 | SA-HSLA MA '24
-
Who am I?
[Long Time Policy Debater]
[Previous Experience: Lexington Semi Finalist 22, Dragon Invitational Semi Finalist 21, Various Speaker Awards, Dragon Invitational Semi Finalist '22]
[K Debater]
Arguments
Run what you wish (MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND IT)
[Aff: Topical version of the Affirmative]
[Negative: Kritiks (Love them if they are allowed) (Please use a Counter Plan and make sure you know how to counter a permutation)]
Spreading/Speaking:
You are able to spread but make it where I can fully understand you
What I want from you?
Call me Zack, not judge
30s are given to speakers who are able to demonstrate high understanding of the topic at hand
Run Jokes, +0.25 if you make a joke about your argument and it can be correlated with it, -0.1 if you're mean and unkind with the joke +0.5 if you make a personal example [you'll start at 27.5 with me and go up or down based on how good or bad you do as a speaker]
No (Racism, Sexism, Homophobia, Etc, as it will not be allowed in the judging space)
Be Respectful
Email me (always)
Zackfdebate@gmail.com [Possibly could change] [Or simply ask]
Hi! I'm a policy debater at Brooklyn Tech and my pronouns are she/her.
Add me to the email chain - slforman5@gmail.com
General
I am tech>truth and I will vote on anything (spreading is fine as well.) However, I will not vote for you if you are racist, homophobic, or say anything hateful/harmful during the round (I will also lower your speaks.)
Please remember to impact your arguments and extend evidence.
CX is binding, but for something your opponents said to be put on the flow, say it in your speech!
CX is open
In the rebuttal speeches don't forget to tell me why I should vote for you. Write the ballot!
Specific args
DAs - I like das but remember to extend links and impact them out.
CP - cps are a decent strat and I will vote on them.
K - Ks can lead to really good and interesting rounds but make sure you know what you are talking about. If you can't explain it and your opponents point this out, I will not vote on it.
Theory - I will vote on theory.
Hi, I’m Faith Jones, a 10th grade policy debater that competes on the Brooklyn Tech Debate Team.
Pronouns: She/Her
Policy Debate History
- 4 years at SA Ditmas Park
- 2 years at Brooklyn Tech
TL;DR:
Yes, I would like to be put on the email chain: faithcatherinejones@gmail.com
Yes, open cx is fine, just make sure your opponents are ok with it as well.
As long as you’re clear, spreading is also fine.
Lastly, run whatever you want. I don’t care as long as you are respectful to your opponents and I as a judge.
——————————————————————
Opinions on specific args:
T: Yes.
FW: This makes my life so much easier as a judge, please run this and make sure you extend the arg throughout the debate.
Theory: Interesting arg would love to see it be run.
DAs: I like DAs. Debaters must make sure to to extend the link and explain impact calc and how your impacts outweigh your opponents impacts.
CPs: They’re fine. Debaters make sure to explain the net benefit and why the cp is mutually exclusive.
Ks: Please run this. This year’s topic is extremely problematic, so point that out. Just make sure the impact and the alt for the K are clear.
Heg good args: I won’t vote against these args, but I hate them. I personally feel as though these args are problematic as they completely neglect America’s history of wrong doing.
Any discriminatory behavior or args will result in me docking speaker points.
Other Things:
(Credits to Ruby for the rest)
CX is binding, but you have to bring it up in a speech for it to be a part of my decision.
Spreading is fine but please slow down for card titles/authors, analytics, and rebuttal speeches.
I’m tech > truth until I think it interferes with clash. In other words, if you make claims that are so obviously false that it’s hard for your opponent to engage with your arguments, I’ll be much more truth > tech. Also, if there’s a very close debate on an obviously false argument, I probably won’t vote for the false argument.
If you have any questions about my paradigm please ask me before the round.
Email: cking2348@bths.edu
Hi, my name is Calvin, I’m a third year policy debater at Brooklyn Tech, and I’m mostly a k debater. My pronouns are he/him.
Run whatever you want, I vote on everything.
Don’t read anything racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.
Open cx is fine, I don't flow it, but I do listen to it, so don't be mean/extra.
Read an overview.
Tell me how I should vote and why in the 2nr/2ar.
Spreading is fine but please slow down for card titles/authors, analytics, and rebuttal speeches.
I try to avoid judge intervention, but I will throw out any completely new arguments made in the 2ar.
tech > truth
Hello! My name is Nate Kolker and I use He/Him pronouns. I'm a 4th year policy debater at Brooklyn Tech. My email is nkolker2725@bths.edu
I'm heavily inclined to vote on PIC's theory.
I don't have a preference on speed, as long as you slow down for analytics and tags and speak clearly.
Time Keeping - I will keep time for all arguments, but I highly encourage debaters to keep their own time for each argument and also to keep time for their opponents speeches, in order to encourage a nice tight debate.
I very much as a judge appreciate Crossex's that don't run over time.
I love a good topicality argument if it's run well and you understand it
Arguments that are obviously racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, etc. are not OK. (Read: you will lose if you go ahead and run them.)
I enjoy a substantive debate that has real clash versus ill formed half baked ideas or ill-linked impacts
I appreciate weighing mechanisms where you explain to me why I should weigh your impacts over your opponents.
Rudeness and talking over your opponent when they are already speaking first will lose you speaker points.
I appreciate when debaters give me voters during the final speeches in a round. Your final speech should have a clear explanation of why I should vote for your team.
I will take off speaks for speeches ended before the time is up.
I'm fine with all arguments as long as you have a link, a link chain, and an impact and you show that you clearly understand them. K's are great
I'm tech over truth to an extent. If an obviously false claim is completely dropped, I'll have to vote on it. However, if there's a tight debate on your obviously false claim, do NOT go for the obviously false claim! I weigh truth in my voting decisions. This doesn't really apply to most traditional nuke war type policy arguments; I get that dramatizing is kind of the point of policy.
email: rubylyttonhirsch@gmail.com
I wanna be on the email chain but I mostly flow by ear
Hi, my name is Ruby, I’m a third year policy debater at Brooklyn Tech, and I’m mostly a k debater. My pronouns are she/her.
Obviously don’t read anything racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.
I love ks but if you can't explain/don't understand your k, I probably won't want to vote for you, especially if your opponent points it out.
T is really fun. If you go for t in the 2nr make sure you kick the rest of your args and go on t and only t.
CPs and DAs are also cool
Random things:
CX is binding, but for something your opponents said to be put on the flow, say it in your speech. Open cx is fine.
If they drop something, point it out and tell me that it matters.
Spreading is fine but please slow down for card titles/authors, analytics, and rebuttal speeches.
I try to avoid judge intervention, but I will throw out any completely new arguments made in the 2ar.
Write my ballot for me in the 2nr/2ar, and make sure to fully extend things throughout the round.
My email is: jasleen.moise@lmghs.org
email: tiaranaselli@gmail.com
I wanna be on the email chain but I mostly flow by ear
Hi, my name is Tiara! I debated policy for four years at Success Academy Hudson Yards. Currently, I’m a third year policy debater at Brooklyn Tech, and I’m mostly a k debater. My pronouns are she/her.
Obviously don’t read anything racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.
I love ks but if you can't explain/don't understand your k, I probably won't want to vote for you, especially if your opponent points it out.
T is really fun. If you go for t in the 2nr make sure you kick the rest of your args and go on t and only t.
CPs and DAs are also cool
Random things:
CX is binding, but for something your opponents said to be put on the flow, say it in your speech. Open cx is fine.
Please maintain organization through your speeches and signpost.
Spreading is fine but please slow down for card titles/authors, analytics, and rebuttal speeches.
I try to avoid judge intervention, but I will throw out any completely new arguments made in the 2ar.
Write my ballot for me in the 2nr/2ar, and make sure to fully extend things throughout the round.
Lastly, please have fun in the round!
Run whatever you want
Don't say anything inhumane
I will be timing you so don't try to steal prep
Call me Joanne or Judge (your pref)
I'll give you a 30 if you have the best speech in the world
Make jokes related to your speech, I might just boost your speaks
Add me to the email chain: joanneopokudebate@gmail.com
DON'T MAKE THE ROUND BORING, MAKE IT INTERESTING ;).
Contact me at: oyosairee@gmail.com
Bit about me:
--I debated for SAMW/SAHW(it's complicated) for all four years of middle school, I now debate for HSLA-MA doing policy.
--If you lose/win, It's because I genuinley thought you did and will provide extensive reasoning both post round and right after as to why I made that choice
-Don't bother trying to argue it, take the feedback and go, I'll answer questions whenever you have them
preferences in terms of speaks
Try to time yourselves,as a catch all for mistakes.
Clarity over speed, at the end of the day, I'll prefer the most well articulated arguments over the ones spoken the fastest. Open Cross, but 1 partner should not be the only one talking, that makes the other one look bad, which is not what either you nor I want.(closed cross if there is a maverick debating)
Do not say anything disrespectful, or discriminatory, including but not limited to , racism good, sexism good, homophobia good. Your speaks will die
DO IMPACT CALC, especialy if you're a novice. Tell me WHY your impacts are so important, why it's more important the other team
--Role of the ballot arguments--> please don't make me vote on this, I personally think it's a dumb argument, especially in novice, just explain it well
Keep it fun!reference things, add jokes, we're not congressmen here.(yet)
you need to disclose before the round, teams win because they're better, not because they cheat
At the end of the day you're here to have fun and to learn, even if you lose all your rounds you're still learning something
add me to the chain: alyssa.santiago@lmghs.org
i like k's :) run anything you're good at though! i'm cool with policy-based debate too if cp's and da's are your thing.
If you want to play rock, paper, scissors with me before a round, I will not back down to such a challenge. (If you lose I won't doc speaks)
I've done debate for 5 years now.
Run whatever you want. I'm fine with everything, K's, CP's, Da's, and others.
Don't say anything inhumane. Don't to be rude, say anything racist, sexist, or slander of any kind. If you do something like this, then I will be forced to give my ballot to the other team.
Make sure you add me on your email chains for cases with this email:poppylains@gmail.com
If you spread or speak fast notify the other team, I'm fine with whatever pace make sure you guys are clear, I like speed but I also like clarity.
Remember this is a learning space, we are here to improve not hate on eachother.
Tech>Truth, but if you presude me otherwise I will lean with the truth.
Hi, I am Khadydiatou Thiam,
Email chain: thiamkhadydiatou05@gmail.com
This is my Paradigm:
- Make sure that you always stick to your case.
-Don't drop any arguments (But if the other team does not point out the dropped argument I might let it slide).
-Make sure that your Affirmative has a clear plan because if I cannot understand it I won't vote for it.
-Impacts Calc is an easy ballot for me
-Disads: Running this is one of the common negative strategies. I would vote on it but just make sure they link to the Affirmative that you are running it against
-Counterplan: These are an okay strategy just make sure you run it with a disad or at least have a net benefit.
-Permutation: This is the easiest way to address a CP just make sure that you don't drop it and prove that it would work.
- Topicality: This is not the best negative strategy in my opinion but if it makes sense I will vote on it.
-K: I'm a flex debater so I would love listening to a K Debate
-Other than that just don't be rude, don't say anything offensive and most importantly HAVE FUN!
Hi Im Mariama :)
bronxsciencedebatedocs@gmail.com --> add to the chain
hidden.aspec@gmail.com --> add to the chain
Im a senior debater at Bronx Science.
Tech >>>>>>>>> truth
Clarity >>>>> speed
email chain >>>>>> speech drop
i'm probably judging novice, so if its packet please only read packet args. if its open, I don't care what you run but you should only run arguments u understand, I will be annoyed if you cant explain any of your args in cx.
pls time your own prep and speeches, I forget to time but I try my best to time everyones prep/speech.
don't steal prep :((
be nice to ur partner if ur rude to ur partner im docking ur speaks .5 :)
be assertive in cx, not rude their distinct.
for more detail view guy blooms paradigm.
(ma-ree-ah-ma)
Dont read anything racist/xenephobic/sexist etc. its an auto L and the lowest speaks possible.
Free Palestine
(She/Her)
7yrs of policy debate experience
Include me on the email chain -- My email: iby2248@gmail.com
- - -
I'm good with spreading.
Don't be any of the "-ists" (Racist, Sexist, etc.)
Call me Judge Or Ibrahima (Ee-bruh-hee-ma) in round (really wtv you prefer)
- - -
I can be swayed by any argument as long as it is fleshed out well. I believe in Tabula Rasa, although from my experience in debate, I like it when the Affirmative weighs the hypothetical implications of not doing the affirmative effectively. For the negative, any negative argument (traditional or untraditional) can be ran as long as its argued beyond a threshold.
As a judge, I default negative if the Affirmative has not done enough work to prove how the benefits to implementing the plan outweigh the status quo AND any potential harmful aftereffects to doing the plan. Whether it is a Kritik, TVA, CP, etc., the Aff must provide enough defense of their case and can't rely solely on hypothetical implications.
Not too familiar with this years topic so don't expect me to know every term.
- - -
Don't violate any of the non-negotiables: no sexism, no racism, (any of the -isms). No insensitive comments. No blatant disrespect. Treat debate what it is, an academic space and a platform for the voice of marginalized communities and a way for new ideas to circulate.
- - -
More comments can be given pre-round.
---
DO NOT CHANGE YOUR STRATEGY FOR THE BALLOT - I AM OPEN TO ANY AND ALL ARGUMENTS.
Hey yall,
I'm Shiloh and I am currently a policy debater at SA-HSLA. I do not have many preferences when it comes to arguments and I will enter the round with a clear slate (in other words, run whatever you want). I am a fan of good debating and I will vote for the team that does so best. I like moral obligation/ROJ args. For both sides, If you're going for an extinction impact, give me a clear link chain (don't cry extinction without explaining how it happens). It's up to the debaters to explain to me how I should vote in the round, I would prefer to do as little thinking as possible. Finally, please add me to the email chain: @shiloh.williams@sascholar.org
Neg:
- If you're going to run T, please clearly articulate how the aff violates and extend those arguments over the course of the round. Try not to repeat the same exact ideas because I will get bored. If the round gets messy, I will vote on T but if I believe that the neg does not do a good job of explaining how the aff specifically violates the res and why it's bad for debate I will fall back on the other off
- Clear link chains// Do not say that the aff leads to your impacts without explaining how
- Weigh your impacts with the aff's // create as much clash as possible so it's easier for me to vote
Aff:
- Impact calc
- Why should solving for your impacts be prioritized in the round?
- Clearly explain to me how the aff changes the status quo
Speaking:
- Spreading is fine, but if I cannot understand something I will not flow it
- Open-cross is fine
- I don't like rude debaters.
- This goes without saying but do not say anything outrageously offensive, I will vote you down
Feel free to ask me any questions and good luck !