hi! my name is nitya and i am currently a senior at seven lakes high school! i have been competing on the circuit for the last four years primarily in world schools debate, platform speaking (info/oo), and extemp (mostly foreign/international but i'm also very familiar with domestic/us). i have specific things i am looking for/judging on for different events, so i will list those below.

platform (oo/info): generally, i want a very clear structure and organization for your speeches. for info: history, current-day, and implications (this is more flexible, but the points shouldn't bleed and there should be a clear thesis for your speech). for oo, there needs to be three super distinct sections: problem, impact, and solution- i like tangible solutions. for general presentation requirements, speak with good tone, clarity, and vocal variation. good hand gestures and a speaker's triangle are always a plus. i can also tell if you're not memorized, and memorization is a big part of these events. for info specifically, your boards (if you have them) do not need to be revolutionary; however, they shouldn't detract from your speech or BE your speech- they are there to ADD to your speech. i will not give you a high rank just because your boards are nice, you have to sell it with your speech too. i also like vehicles.

worlds: clear arguments- this is a big one, don't let the debate get too muddy or too theoretical. the event is pretty evenly split on style and content; however, if style is pretty evenly matched, i'm voting on arguments. default to i'm voting on arguments. be aware of wording- in worlds "this house believes/supports/regrets" are NOT action items- i CANNOT vote on solvability is is more theoretical. with "this house would/should" has solvability because the house is actually acting. this is a pet peeve of mine, so do be aware. although there is no evidence in the form of cards/citations in worlds, you NEED to have examples (i know this is harder for impromptu, but solely theoretical examples is not strong/won't be compelling). overall, be clear, be strong in style, and be winning on the flow.

extemp: i'm not a stickler for citations, have them, cite them correctly, but don't let them be your whole speech. i love a good umbrella answer when done correctly, it deepens analysis and it's good. you can be cadence-y that's fine, but still have vocal variation. hand gestures and speaker's triangle are a must. characterize the situation always, never assume i will know exactly what you're talking about. humor is always good, but not necessary.

impromptu: all stylistic stuff from extemp applies here too. use examples, real-world and personal are good.

pf/ld: treat me as lay, be convincing.

i regularly compete in WSD, FX, OO, and DI

kinda familiar with judging PF and LD (i'm a lay judge though please speak at an understandable speed)

fake it till you win

speak 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.

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.

Varsity public speaking and interp, he/him

• be respectful of everyone, no transphobic, homophobic, or racist comments will be tolerated, respect pronouns
• project when you speak and have vocal intonation
• have at least 6 sources in your speeches (for platform speaking)
• avoid fidgeting and rocking back and forth, try and make some hand gestures, but if too confusing, leave your hands at your side
• have fun giving your speech! Let who you are shine through what you talk about!