Please speak clearly and at a pace I can understand what you say. If you decide to speak quickly, please enunciate your words enough for not only me, but for your opponent.

Please give me a road map before you begin to your points.

Try your best and don't be scared to clash. CLASH CLASH CLASH!!!

I am the head Speech, Debate, and Congress coach at Horace High School, ND.

I have a background in English, Speech, and Theatre Education.

Debate:

Decorum matters, so be polite to your opponents, including in the questioning period. You can be firm in cross while being polite, but there is a line that you shouldn't cross during cross.

Make my job of flowing easy, signpost accordingly and don't rush through your contention taglines.

If you speak so fast that I can't understand your argument and flow your argument, I will have a hard time giving you the win.

I will not make links for you.

If you open your speech with a preview of what you are talking about, I expect the preview to be reflective of what you talk about. Example, if you say you are giving voters, you should give clear voters instead of just talking down the flow.

PF: PF isn't Policy. Also, I'm not sure why people keep trying to add frameworks into PF cases, but they won't play into how the round is weighed on the ballot unless both teams willingly accept the framework.

A good first neg in LD will use their time equally between attacking the Aff case and setting up the neg case; 5:30 setting up the Neg case and 1:30 attacking the Aff case is not using time equally in my eyes. The same idea goes for PF.

I like to hear the voters. Don't just say that something flows to your side though, give the rational and link it for me.

Congress:

Delivery and presentation are musts for me: eye contact, conversational tone, posture, and not just reading off computer or notepad.

I will flow your argument, but I will not make the links for you unless they are incredibly obvious.

Be brave and have fun in the session; this is a social activity. I want to see students willing to get up for authorship. If no one is willing to speak or run for PO that's your cue to be a leader.

Even the second aff/ first neg can, and often should, have elements of refutation in there. For the first 2/3-3/4 of speeches, I expect to see clash, but also new arguments being brought in. This is an activity that requires not only research, but also depth of research. Don't get up there and say that the aff or neg has already brought up a point, but not explored it enough, unless you can back it up with new analysis or additional research. The last few speeches should wrap up the debate, especially if debate has been limited and you know that you are one of the last speeches.

Don't play games and try and make the PO look bad unless they have actually made a mistake. Decorum is at the heart of congressional debate and must be respected. Do not be rude or belittling to your competition; you may be the best speaker in the room, but you will lose favor quickly by not respecting your competition and the activity.

Speech number is irrelevant; however, you had better have a good reason for not speaking on each piece of legislation. Quality of speeches, quality of questions, and quality of overall interaction in the chamber is what will get you the ballot from me.

Hi! I'm Chase Bailey and while I never participated in Speech & Debate in high school, I became a part of it as a teacher back in 2015. Since then, I've judged every type of event and grown to love this community. For reference, I graduated from Texas State University with a BA in English and have since taught AP Lang, UT OnRamps, and other advanced level courses. I love a good story, and I spent enough time in the theatre to recognize fake enthusiasm for a genuine empathetic connection to a topic.

I'm not easily offended, and if there is good evidence to back up an argument, I consider it fair game even if it's against something I personally believe in. Mature material and curse words are not offensive to me, but there is a difference between using it for effect and using it because you don't have the necessary vocabulary to insert a more meaningful word. Just as in writing, a good performance will be aware of our current global events and how a joke may strike.

I prefer a more conversational style of speaking that avoids using the same word or phrase over and over as a crutch. Real genuine connections to your piece are important, and faking your way through it by pitching your voice up inauthentically is a real disappointment.

I encourage the DX and FX events to follow a standard speech outline (Intro: hook, intro w/ topic stated, clear answer, and a preview of points to be made; Body: introduction of your point w/ analysis & meta-analysis followed by a clean transition to your next point; and a conclusion with the topic and answer restated along with an overview of the points discussed to tie everything together. Bonus points for making a witty, but meaningful, connection back to your hook!).

For the interpretation events, I vote for the contestant(s) who whisked me away into the story. Therefore, the jarring screams, cursing, and other shocking noises should be used with caution. All movements should have a purpose. Blocking, facial expressions, and again, having a genuine connection to the characters in your piece is SO important. Basically, I want to be entertained!

POI, you are my favorite. It combines my favorite aspects of an interpretation and informative and allows me to be in multiple stories at once. A well put together POI should transition between the pieces in such a way that I am never confused about what piece is being read. Facial expressions, voices, body movements, etc. are all encouraged to pop in and out of each section. Just as with the raw interpretation events, don't let me out of the story that you're telling. Drag me in. The other aspect of a POI that really makes me appreciate a piece is a meaningful thread that allows you to transition between each piece in a clever and witty way.

I wish all of you the best of luck!

I am a parent volunteer judge in my second year. I appreciate the competitor's courage and efforts to put a best foot forward. I find this as a great opportunity to experience the competitors in action.

If you flow too quickly, points may be lost, slow down, quality vs quantity is important. Also, please remember PFD is PFD, LD is LD, and policy stays in policy, debate the topic / resolution. Please respect every individual participating in the competition whether it is a fellow competitor, or your partner, or a judge or a chamber. I will be attentive on how effectively you build your arguments and refute based on the competitor's points. Eye contact is important. I will expect you set the judge expectations for time signals before you start. Content is very important, try to not be too repetitive .Best of luck!

I am the head coach of a middle school speech and debate program. I have taught public speaking for 7 years and coached a competitive team for 1 year. I value good speaking with clear, coherent arguments. I have degrees in Political Science and History. I have taught public school for 12 years and worked as a paralegal through college.

I'm pretty open-minded in general, but vulgar or overly profane statements for pure shock value won't win me over, especially if it isn't age appropriate. Make sure your use of profanity or illicit content actually contributes to the overall performance.

Do not spread. If I cannot follow your argument, I will not vote in your favor. Debate that cannot be understood is pointless so save the gamesmanship for someone else.

Use of evidence is important. Not all evidence is created equally so don't throw blogs and websites out as proof of anything that you say. You should be using valid sources.

Evidence itself does not win an argument. The impact wins for me. Why does this matter? Why should I care? How does it impact my world? If you can convince me that something has a direct impact on me, I will vote for you.

Don't speak in shorthand. Assuming that others will understand your jargon for arguments or citations isn't good speaking.

Command the room. Use movement and emphatic gestures.

Don't be rude. You can make good points without belittling anyone else. It is ok to call out the absurdity of an argument, but not the intelligence of the person making it.

Hello! My name is Dominique Dominguez- a first time judge. The only thing I ask is that you are respectful to your opponents!

Hi! I’m a senior in high school, and I’ve done speech and debate in my state (Texas) since middle school. I mostly have done extemp and policy, but I have also done interp. NSDA has given me an opportunity to improve myself, so I’m hoping it’ll do the same thing with you! I’m a tab judge, meaning I’m okay with pretty much whatever you run as long as it is neither unethical or immoral, but more information on each individual event is below.

I LOVE congress. I’m super excited that I’m judging this today, and I only have a few requests. Firstly, keep going! Do you absolute best in the round and don’t give up! Second, I really don’t want to be a presiding officer, so I strongly encourage y’all to run for PO. Congress is a great opportunity for everyone, and I hope to learn from each of you!

Respect is the most important thing to have in a debate round, and not having it has caused many people to rank low. Be respectful and do your best!

CONGRESS

Debate-wise, I am a congress kid first and foremost. Please be respectful to other competitors. Don't do any blanket attacks on the other side, such as "The Neg are advocating for the end of the world!" or "The Aff must be clinically insane if they believe this bill will change anything!" The only acceptable attacks are either rebuttals or small and clever attacks which aren't very serious.

Additionally, I love extremely weird and clever arguments. For example, when talking about a bill to eliminate single family zoning law, talk about the negative impacts of lawns instead of the housing crisis or structural racism.

Judging-wise, I am not a "blank slate" judge, and if you say something that displays some sort of fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. Constitution, the government, or the topic, then I will probably dock you points. Additionally, if you don't verbally cite your sources, you will not get full points. Please don't repeat points unless you can spin it to be somehow slightly different, or you really hammer in why this point is so important that it must be repeated.

Quick Speaker Point Guides; 0-1; Actively hateful/discriminatory. 4; bit below average speech. 5; Good/Average speech. 6; Great speech! For anything past prelims, I'll hold y'all to a higher standard and be a bit meaner points-wise, so watch out!

PF/LD

I am an impact judge. When judging, I often look to see which side has the most magnitude, smallest timeframe, or least reversibility. I also judge primarily based on of framework, so make sure to use it!

I am also a "Blank Slate" judge, which meant I will accept anything you competitors say even if it makes no sense (as long as you can respond and it's not about debate rules). If your opponent rebuttals your first contention by saying "Sorry, but my star-sign is Scorpio so their first contention falls apart," you better call them out in your next speech or else I'll just assume it's been properly rebutted.

Additionally, I'll flow in your feedback, and make small, little suggestions for both teams. Please look through it so you can see exactly what I'm thinking throughout the round.

POLICY

I have very little experience with policy, so please go easy on me. Aff must win all the stock issues or else they lose. Not sure what else to say. oh yeah, also, go easy on me.

Hi everyone!

I mainly judge congress and that was the event I did for five years; however, I do have a lot of competitive experience in extemp and have been in outrounds for it as well. I've also competed in extemp, PF, interp, impromptu, and oratory, so I'd say I have a wide depth of knowledge of different events.

I've had success across all these events, so I promise I know what I'm doing when I'm judging and do my best to be fair.

I do flow.

For congress:

First and foremost, I'm looking for respect to other members of your chamber especially during questioning. Please don't speak over one another. Some amount of friendly fire is ok but it cannot be offensive or rude in any way, neither can your speeches.

In your speeches, make sure that you are incorporating the rest of the debate. This is not an oratory event. You should not have your speech memorized or say what you had written from home. Engage with your peers, include refutation and rebuttal. If you are not the first speaker on the bill, it is your responsibility to mention previous speakers!!! Your points should be well organized, so we can understand what you're trying to convey.

Congress is as much a speech event as it is debate, and I evaluate you as such. Your argumentation is equally as important as your presentation. That being said, I will rank you higher if you have a great argument but some stylistic errors, but if you have great style with shallow arguments, I will rank you lower than the type of speaker I mentioned previously.

Start your speech with some type of attention getter instead of just saying "this is the side of the bill I am on." Don't read directly off of your pad, make some eye contact with your audience. If you stumble, that is FINE. I will not penalize you, simply keep going with the rest of your speech. Always be ready to speak or to flip sides. You should have prepped both sides, so it shouldn't be a huge deal if you need to flip. I despise when rounds have to be put on hold because there are too many speakers on one side or no one wants to get up and give a speech.

There is nothing wrong with being the presiding officer (PO)!!! I will judge you based on how fair and efficient you are. Be as invisible as possible when it comes to argumentation, but add some spice in between when calling for speakers or questions. Rounds can easily get boring with repetitive arguments, but a PO has the luxury of engaging in a more conversational tone. If there is a PO election, I will have higher expectations of you. Also, I would highly prefer it if you have an online spreadsheet.

If you wish to amend the bill, please know the procedure before doing so otherwise the chamber goes into chaos.

Please have fun when participating in rounds! Become friends with the other congress people in your chamber because congress kids have a special advantage of having an event that is inherently social.

If you want feedback, I'm happy to talk to you after round or can give you my email if you would like and can message you my commentary.

Good luck!

Hey everyone! My name is Fidencio Jimenez, and I am currently the head congressional debate coach for Modernbrain Academy. I have competed in a variety of individual and debate events during my time as a competitor in the high school and collegiate circuits of competition. My general approach to judging follows as such:

Email for document sharing: fidencio.jimenez323@gmail.com

Congressional Debate

Make sure your claims are linked and warranted with evidence. If you don't make it clear how your sources and information connect, you just sound like you are listing sources without contextualizing them in the round. This usually results in speakers presenting impacts that were not explicated thoroughly. I do not flow arguments that fail this basic requirement.

Incorporate the legislation in your arguments. I read the topics before each round, make sure you do too. If your points do not connect with the actual plan (that being I don't buy that the topic viably solves the problems or creates claimed harms), I will not flow them.

Keep the debate topical. If the link between your claims and the bill is obvious there isn't much to worry about here. If you don't think the grounds for the link between your harm/benefit are clear, justify yourself by explaining what mechanisms in the legislation make it so that your claims come to fruition. This makes it so you avoid mistranslation and prevent judges (myself included, it can happen to anyone) from overlooking/misunderstanding something in the topic.

For presiding officers, I ask you to be firm, deliberate, and clear in your instructions. The more a PO demonstrates the ability to take control over the round to avoid complications, the more they will be rewarded.

EX: Round does not have anyone who wants to speak so you call for recess, call for splits, and urge people to swap sides or speak.

Policy/LD/PUFO/Parli

Spreading- I do not mind if you spread. However, if your speed makes it so you become audibly incomprehensible I will clear you. Spread at a pace you can actually handle and perform stably.

Counterplans (for where it is relevant)- I am not a fan, too many times it seems like the plans do not tackle the benefits provided by the proposition. If you can link a counter-plan that establishes a harm, run it, but if it doesn't tackle their actual case, you are better off avoiding it.

K's- Same thing as counter plans. There is a time and place but if the K is not extremely fleshed out or justified, I will not consider it. There has to be substantial real-world harm clearly established. Make sure to weigh why the educational value of the discussion is not worth the consequences it creates.

IE's

I evaluate based on performance and the educational value of a competitor. For instance, if someone has a cleaner performance, but does not have a topic that is educationally substantive or as critical as someone with a slightly less clean performance, the person with the more substantive topic will get a higher mark. This is why for interpretation events I ask your thesis is made clear within your introduction and for events like impromptu and platform speaking to avoid surface-level theses or topics.

Hello! First and foremost, thank you for taking the time to read my paradigm. If you have the time, please read the sections that are important to you. My paradigm is broken up by events, and each section will include my preferences and general thoughts on how the round should go. Each section will include a TLDR if you don't have time for whatever reason and it's right before the round, but otherwise PLEASE read the entire thing!

VERY GENERAL OVERVIEW; TLDR

I competed for three years in Public Forum Debate, Congressional Debate, extemporaneous speaking, and Impromptu speaking. For two of those years, I personally coached many in extemp, impromptu, and public forum while also helping others in congress. If you have me for any of the ad libs events, congress, or pf, these are my strong suits and I hope you like me better than your average parent judge who has never competed themselves. I as a judge will work to accommodate you while maintaining the integrity of the round and the sprit of speech and debate. i.e - If you need a minute before the round starts to take a breath or get a drink of water, please inform me and feel free. I was there not too long ago myself. Finally, speech and debate is about growing your skills as a speaker, a debater, and growing yourself as a person. Not winning. With that being said have fun, and just be respectful of others!

CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE

TLDR; I know what congress is (for the most part).

Full version

I was in house finals at nationals.

PUBLIC FORUM;

TLDR; I know how to flow tech debate, but I like it when you make good arguments that are backed by a solid logical link chain in a more of a lay appeal style. DO NOT SPREAD. I can understand spreading (mostly), but I can understand your speech better if you do not spread and you explain everything in a logical manner, not just trying to spit out as many words as you can in a minute. If you start speaking too fast, I will simply put down my pen and stop flowing. Just rhetoric won't get you very far either, actually interact with your opponents arguments and WEIGH them against your own.

Full version

Speech and debate is meant to make you better at debating and speaking. I do not like spreading at all. I understand speaking slightly faster than normal in order to get all of your points in (more so if your in summary or FF), but you should not spread. Public forum is supposed to be PUBLIC FORUM, it was originally a "laymans" form of debate, in which someone off the street should be able to judge your round with reasonable competency. I am well aware that the debate space is all about inclusion, however spreading in public forum if anything makes the debate inaccessible to those who can not understand spreading (either opponents or the judges). If you start spreading too much I will simply put down my pen and stop flowing. Same thing goes for theory, don't do it in PF. If it's a local tournament, 99% chance there is no reason to be running theory in PF. If you really feel you have to in pf, in my round, my understanding of theory is minimal in comparison to someone who spent three years doing LD. Chances are I won't be able to understand it for the most part, and if it comes down to a technical level I probably won't weigh/vote on it. If you have to read theory, first ask me if I'm okay with it in the round. If you just start reading it off, especially in the first or second speech (without asking me), I'll just drop it. In crossfire look at the judge so things don't get heated. Be respectful of each other, but also be assertive. I don't weigh crossfire unless you get a concession or have an important point to make, however you have to bring it up crossfire in speeches for me to weigh it. In general, if your respectful, there should be zero issues. Next, I want to see actual interaction in the round between you and your opponents arguments. Simply giving me endless rhetoric or restating your case won't get you far if you don't respond to the uniqueness of your opponents arguments and how they WEIGH against your own. PLEASE WEIGH in summary and final focus, and if possible do so in rebuttal. Make the vote for me as a judge easy to make, tell me why your side should win the debate comprehensively. I go off the flow, I'm mostly tech over truth unless you straight up lie. Lastly, have fun! Time goes by fast, and debate is something that should be fun and propel you in your future endeavors.

Extemp. (to be updated very soon)

Impromptu (to be updated very soon)

All other debate formats, and IE events will be updated very soon!

I've done congress since freshmen year, and qualified to quarters last year, so I know the way of debate.

I personally love respectful, passionate, and speeches. Everything that happens during the debate will be reflected in my rankings. It's ok to slow down, be nice, don't worry about messing it up, it's all part of the progress.

As someone who fell in love with speech and debate, Just have fun! It's going to be an amazing experience, I hope you continue this journey after middle school.

Introduction:

Hello students! Welcome to the 2023 Nationals Debate Tournament! I am so glad you're here! :)

My name is Abigail Lindgren, although feel free to call me Abby I don't mind. My pronouns are she/her/hers and I am honored to be judging you today! :D

I am a high school student, and I come from the great state of Iowa from a little small town called Oskaloosa. I've been debating for two years. I debated in pf and congress, but I like congress a lot better. I placed 8th at Iowa's state competition, and achieved the title of superior senator. Additionally, I qualified for the National Tournament in the House and placed 2nd there. So, I've been around the block a few times with congress! :)

Information for Debaters:

Content: Organization, Evidence & Language:

Have your thoughts logically organized by developing your ideas and thoughts through credible statistics and testimony. Please have article names and dates! Have an intro, conclusion, transitions, and thesis to establish a purpose.

Argument and Refutation:

Contribute to the debate! Add something new by building off of what's been presented, and present new points to make the debate more credible! Respond to questions as confidently as you can (it's ok to be scared!!) and make sure to address their points.

Delivery:

Deliver your speeches clearly and loudly! It's okay if you stumble your words, but recovery is the most essential tool. So if you make a mistake, don't let it throw you off! Keep going! :)

Don't be afraid to make motions! If a debate gets stale, move on! Communicate through the motions and advocate for yourself!

Information for the P.O.:

Speaker Recognition:

Clearly explain your procedure! Don't let the other debaters do the guessing work! Be consistent with your procedure, rulings, and make sure you follow proper recency.

Parly Procedure:

Run a fair and efficient chamber with the use of parley procedure, however do not let the chamber be slowed down because of procedure. Consult the written rules and rule immediately on a bills status.

Delivery/Presence:

Display your command over the chamber! You have the power! Use it wisely and fairly. Don't hesitate to rule abusive or inappropriate motions out of order.

Most Importantly...

HAVE FUN! This is supposed to be a fun event for all of us involved. It's okay to be nervous too! I'm so excited to see what all of you bring to the table! YOU ALL ARE GOING TO DO WONDERFUL!!! :D

Good luck to you all! <3

Welcome to the wonderful page of the Renee!

For debate, the main things I look for is how well you back up your arguments with evidence. The evidence should support your central line of reasoning well and should be factually true and usually pretty recently dated, depending on your debate format. I can give more things I look for before round if need be. Also, be respectful to opponents :)

For unprepped speeches, I look for structure, creative plots/ideas/evidence, and good analysis of why your evidence connects to your points and why your topic matters. There should always be a main theme to your speech.

For prepped speeches, I look for a fluid, well-delivered speech that addresses interesting ideas. Usage of pauses, dramatic effect, facial expressions, tone, etc. are things that I typically look for.

Feel free to ask me any questions about these before/during round(not during a speech)! Please ask me if you have any doubts! I'm mostly a chill judge, but still am reasonable. Good luck to all of you!

Hi all reading this. First things first, good work checking paradigms your coach taught you well.

Next a bit about me. I have been coaching middle school debate for 6 years, competed in PF (2 years), LD (2 years), and college policy (1 year). Also, I serve on my city's Housing and Human Services Commission overseeing matters related to section 8, housing insecurity, and now Emergency Rental Assistance.

Finally, on to the part you are probably looking for. The flow determines the round. Please be sure to keep bringing up the most important contentions and don't drop them. I don't want to make a decision in your round because the flow should do it for me. Also be sure to clash, try to address every point your opponent brings up. You don't always need citations. If you can use raw logic to explain why a contention is incorrect then it is incorrect, just address it.

Speaker points are based on both your argument and performance. PF should be accessible if you spread you can still win the round but will have lower speaker points.

I will be expecting clear articulation and logical presentation. While I do not take points off for speed, I do take points off for a lack of fluency or clarity, which speed often creates.  As for rate of spread, unless your diction is crisp, keep rate to a 3 on the spread scale.

If there are any aspects of the debate I look to before all others, they would be framework and impact analysis. Not doing one or the other or both makes it much harder for me to vote for you, either because I don't know how to evaluate the impacts in the round or because I don't know how to compare them. Clear signposts within your presentation are also helpful. I will be expecting clear and precise sponsorship speeches and logical class refutation.

{CONGRESS} The following things are what I'm looking for in speeches:

• A clear and succinct intro that previews the content of the speech
• Three distinct points that are differentiated by both verbal and physical signposting
• Each point contains at least one piece of evidence. If that piece of evidence comes from a news article, please state both the source and the date of publication to the nearest month (i.e., "According to a May 2022 article from the Wall Street Journal...").
• A brief conclusion that makes it clear why your peers should vote on your side.
• Times between 2:45 and 3:10 (as close to 3:00 as possible!)
• If later in a cycle, attempts to rebut previous speakers (or at least acknowledgement of previous speakers)

Use a variety of evidence! Don't rely too heavily on any one thing; anecdotes are great, but match those with empirical evidence. Conversely, statistics are great, but mentioning an anecdote can help me understand the real-world impacts that will result from either passing or failing the legislation. I am willing to listen to any argument so long as you back it up with evidence!

In questioning, defend your ideas with poise; there's no need to raise your voice or cut off the questioner. If you don't know something, that's okay; but too many concessions to people asking questions lessens the impact of your speech.

Overall, if you communicate your ideas effectively within the timeframe given to you, then I will rank you highly!

Hello to anyone who is reading this paradigm. For a quick outline to find specific information it will go My Experience, LD Paradigm, Policy Paradigm, PFD Paradigm, and Congress Paradigm.

Experience - I have been involved in competitive speech and debate for almost a decade either competing or judging. In high school, I competed in all of the public address events specializing in the Extemps. On the debate side, I regularly competed in Congress, and I also did WSD, PFD, and BQD. I am currently in College competing on the College circuit. For a brief academic background, I am a Masters Student in Communication Studies specializing in rhetoric and persuasion with a background in political theory. I have judged many times and have judged late-out rounds at several large tournaments. I am a Coach at the high school level as well, coaching the debate events and extemps.

LD Paradigm

Value/VC Debate————X—————Contention debate

(Clear) Speed—————————X—Normal Speech (I will drop for excessive speed)

Competing interps——————X——Resonability

Tech———————————————X Truth

“This isn’t policy”—X————————“Policy arguments” fine (If you make a policy argument link it directly to the Value)

Credentials --X---------------------- Smith 19

K———————————————X—Not K

More Cards——————————X—Better cards

More Cards———————X————Longer Cards

Links more important————X-———Imp more important (Make sure to explain why xyz is persuasive/influential.)

Policy Paradigm

Policymaker paradigm

(Clear) Speed—————————X—Normal Speech (I will drop for excessive speed)

CP------------------------X-----No CP (I prefer traditional debates, however, if you run a CP make sure it is mutually exclusive.)

Topicality --------------------X----- No Topicality (In my opinion, T is not to be used as a weapon. Thus I only consider T if you are only running T and pretty much nothing else.)

Credentials --X---------------------- Smith 19

K———————————————X—Not K

More Cards——————————X—Better cards

More Cards———————X————Longer Cards

Links more important————-——X—Imp more important (Make sure to explain why xyz is persuasive/influential.)

PFD Paradigm

(Clear) Speed—————————X—Normal Speech (I will drop for excessive speed)

Credentials --X---------------------- Smith 19

K———————————————X—Not K

More Cards——————————X—Better cards

More Cards———————X————Longer Cards

Links more important————-——X—Imp more important (Make sure to explain why xyz is persuasive/influential.)

Congress Paradigm

• Style - First 4 speakers on a bill must lay out foundational arguments with the 3rd and 4th speakers doing light refutation. Every speaker after that must at least attempt to respond to other speakers before them or will not likely place high on my ballot.

• CX - Remain active in asking cross as I use it to break ties. For those answering, be on your toes, as I do take cx answers into account for your rank.

• Arguments - I do not generally find arguments saying the bill is unconstitutional very interesting or persuasive. I will read the legislation, so if you quote a line make sure to use it correctly.

• Professionalism - Try not to emulate the behavior of some current members of congress. Be respectful to your opponents and engage constructively with their arguments. You will lose ranks for being unprofessional.

Hi, my name is Kenny and I competed in Speech and Debate all four years of High School and will be competing in college. I have vast amounts of experience in Congressional Debate, and have competed in Public Forum, Parlimentary, and World Schools in the past. I'm pretty chill, if you have questions just ask, I won't be like Oh My GoD yOu AsKeD a QuEsTiOn AuToMaTiC 7. That's just stupid. If you wanna see what I prefer, here you go but really its no different than most judges. Just do you, be cool, have fun. But if you want a full paradigm, I typed this out during class when I was bored:

In general, when it comes to events (both IE and debate), I prefer an understandable pace of delivery, so if you do speak fast I will be fine with it as long as it is understandable and I can keep pace with the piece. Also, while you are in round, be sure to be respectful to your fellow competitors, judges, and spectators, rudeness is something that isn't tolerated in a formal educational setting like Speech and Debate.

For Debate in general, make the debate about the spirit of the argument and the overall flow. Still have your definitions, models, impacts, weighs, and all that stuff but do not be abusive with definitions. You can run all the Ks and Ts all you want, as long as its an engaging debate I'll be happy. (Also, they are just fun imo). Rebuttals and counterclaims should be the same way. I will say, if you want to be funny and make jokes, feel free, I'm some uptight weirdo. While asking tough questions and trying to undermine your opponent is encouraged, be sure not to fall into the realms of personal attacks. Secondly, if you are going to spread PLEASE send me your case and your opponent your case. Also be sure to steer clear of logical fallacies (ad hominem, slippery slope, worst case, strawman, etc) as these will be looked down upon, especially if your opponent calls you out on it.

For Individual debate events, my paradigms are as follows:

Public Forum

In Pofo, be especially sure to set a solid framework in the debate, but do not make your argument rely solely on tech. In crossfire be respectful but do dig into your opponents argument. Tough questions and solid answers lead to both a good debate and making your argument better. Keep good flow and be sure in summary speeches to address it, and these speeches are especially important and give you a chance to explain why you win the debate under the framework. A solid ending will lead to better results in round.

Lincoln Douglas

Same as Public Forum, have a solid framework, don't rely on tech. If your neg and aff makes an abusive framework, call them out on it. Be respectful with questions and when you rebute your opponent, don't be a jerk. You can have some sass but be nice. Keep a good flow, summarize the debate well, and lay out your arguments well. I judge the debate over how good you laid out your arguments, attacked your opponents arguments, summarized the debate, and told me why your side won.

Parli

Parli is fun. We love it. Remember the usual, be nice, be respectful, blah blah blah. The important thing I'm looking for here is as follows: Make sure your arguments are clear and concise. If you have 2 really good points, I'll be happier with that than if you have 3 okay points. Don't feel pressured to always have 3 main contentions, that doesn't dictate who wins a debate. Be confident in answering questions, even if you can't elaborate much on it. When I judge a Parli round, I look for this: Who had the better overall case, how many clashes did you win and how does your argument outweigh your opponents, how well points were made in both POIs and speeches, how well you summarized the debate and made the case to me that you won. Your last speech to me is the most important, explain to me why you won the debate.

Policy:

If your gonna spread and not give me your case before the round, I'm gonna judge the debate on what I can pick up. Make your arguments and your rebuttals about the merits of the argument, not just technicalities and things like that. Speechwise, I'm fine with new evidence and arguments in your 2NC, but not in the 1NR (even though its the second half of the block). 1AR can use new evidence and arguments only if its in rebuttal to arguments from the 2NC. Any new arguments from 1NR, 2NR, or 2AR will not be on my flow.

Congress

PO: I will be judging you based on how good of a job you do following procedure. If you repeatedly need correction, your rank will go down, if you are flawless it will go up. Your job is to lead the chamber to the greatest debate possible and your rank will be dependent on how good of a job you do of that

Everyone else: Good speeches are a must. Especially in competitive rounds you only get a handful of opportunities at this. Giving solid arguments (especially in early speeches on legislation) is crucial and will impact your score greatly. Furthermore, those giving speeches later in a piece of legislation (there is no specific number, but once arguments become repetitive is the general time), give summaries and rebuttals. There is no need to bring new arguments in on speech 6 for aff, take time to address the opposing arguments and summarize the debate for both your colleagues and the judges, and effectively doing this is crucial to both a good debate and your ranking. This is not saying that rebuttals and summaries are more important than constructive speeches, as those who make solid arguments that come up in the debate repeatedly are great ways to get points. Questions are also crucial to a good debate. Asking tough questions and trapping your opponent (especially in direct questioning) are signs of a good debater. Being able to remain calm and answer tough questions are also signs of a good debater. Congress is like ice cream: the scoops themselves are your speeches, but the toppings that really make it pop and stand out are your questions. Mixing both of those is how you rank high in a Congress round.

ut austin '27 (government/economics/plan ii)

1A/2N in hs (memorial qp), not currently debating in college

email chain: gzqjudging@gmail.com

accomodations/disability notice: i have an auditory processing disorder. i probably can't type and process your highest unclear speed. err on the side of being loud and articulate well or i'm going to miss stuff. or send analytics. tired of ppl not respecting this cheers ^^

longhorn classic:ngl i forgot to fill out my ballots more so email me if you want more comments lmao

tldr: i think there are really only 4 things about me that you probably have to know

in round expectations: if you are unnecessarily rude and condescending at any point in time it will make me upset to vote for you and you will almost certainly catch a 25 (or lower than what i would originally think you deserve). i'm not going to expect you to be best friends but there's a bottom line. be reasonable and be kind

ivis/accessibility: i am very sympathetic to legitimate ivis. i don't think your opponent needs to run an ivi for me to down you if you're running something exclusionary. the moment that i see something exclusionary in any sense, i will not continue flowing and i will submit my ballot.

ideological background: i was almost solely an identity k debater in high school, but i went to policy-oriented camps (zag '20, utnif '19, utnif '21). i also read philosophy in my free time. i think this means i can evaluate most debates pretty well but i am probably best at judging identity k debates. i also come from the gonzaga camp of credentials matter which is the main opinion i have on larping.

competitive background: i did policy debate at memorial high school, competed on the nat circuit semi-regularly and did kind of decently my senior year. my partner and i were largely lone wolves for most of our careers. i was almost exclusively a 2N except for like 2 tournaments my freshman year and like one or two rounds my senior year. it highlights mistakes but hasn't really impacted my inclination to vote one way or the other.

larp debate:

credentials: i don't really have strong opinions on larp debate (or policy debate lmao) other than i think credentials and where authors are from can strongly sway the direction of the debate =)

kritikal debate:

literature: i am relatively familiar with most identity literature, and know more than enough to know if you're wrong. i am most familiar with [techno]orientalism, set col, and cap. i know buzzwords, but i never really got why you would use buzzwords instead of just explaining unless it was really necessary. take that how you will i suppose.

debating style: don't run like… an overview in front of me. i'd say this probably applies to poems and the sort too but i get how that's usually a part of the case. either way, i didn't know how to flow them in high school and i still don't know how to flow them. i never really saw a point unless it was explaining the thesis of the k, but you should not like. expect me to flow it lol. i'm not going to and i def will not flow it on another page

links: i gotta say i'm not suuuper into state links unless your k is sketchy and there's a reasonable chance you couldn't find a link, i strongly prefer specific k links, but i get it. i was a 2n at some point too, i'm not going to be mad if your link is generic (with restrictions)

but also as a 1A, people extrapolating obviously generic state links in the block (specifically to cap ks) were frustrating af because i had to make entirely new offense like 99% of the time. i am sympathetic to 1As who have to answer that, especially if your 1NC card clearly has no part that talks abt your extrapolation, UNLESS it's a sketchy aff where there are probably not easily available links. even links to one part of the topic are better lmao (probably the best tbh, that's what i usually did with my sketchy k).

kritikal affs: i actually really enjoy k affs and one of the parts of debate i really enjoyed was coming up with a story for the aff. feel free to run any sort of k aff in front of me, especially if it's a fun identity K affs. i like reading kritikal literature because i like rethinking some of the ways i view the world – i would like to see affs that do that.

framework: however, even as someone who ran k affs, i think many k affs fail to explain how their model of debate is good. you won't have a hard time convincing me that education is the terminal impact to framework but you should probably explain why theirs isn't good for education. i actually think i probably vote against framework more often than not, it's usually just not compelling enough to me because i think framework is often a way to not have to debate the substance of identity k affs (ie: a lot of people are uncomfortable with the fact that the world is in fact not good for a lot of people who live in it). disclaimer: go ham w it vs pomo affs lmao

topicality and theory:

topicality: i like topicality. i think it's overlooked as a viable 2NR strategy. i have no particular preferences on it.

theory: theory is fun when you're not being annoying about it. if you just dropped 11 points on the states cp on your opp who doesn't spread i'm not going to flow 50 states fiat. if you put it at the top and don't extend it and read 12 other points i am going to be kind of upset ngl why would you make me type it then. time sucks bad !

i generally am a firm believer in condo good. i don’t think that there’s a lot of instances where i lean aff, but use your judgement and be reasonable.

framework/t-usfg:

there are strategic ways to about this and there are unstrategic ways to go about this. i am probably most inclined towards education as a terminal impact to framework. like i mentioned at the top, the fact that i was from a small school (kind of) means that i am highly inclined towards structural fairness > procedural fairness and you will have a hard time convincing me that procedural fairness (see: you follow speech times) is still more important because it "rectifies in-round unfairness" or whatever. you literally get disqualified if you don't follow the rules – to me, i don't think people are motivated to follow the rules so people can equally access the debate space. feel free to argue otherwise

miscellaneous:

• i will miss things, both because i am human and because i have a hearing disorder. if i missed an analytic it is not on purpose, but the chances of it changing my decision are low to none, especially because i strongly believe if it's going to sway the direction of the debate you should have slowed down on it.

• i think debate is competitive but in no way has that ever meant "be rude" to your opponents.

• i don't think sending docs counts as prep and you don't need to count it, but it's not like people can't tell when you steal prep lmao. i literally watched people prep for like 3 minutes after the timer was stopped. don't steal prep. i will call you out if i think you're taking too long.

• i've been told many a time i look unhappy naturally. i'm probably not that upset about what you're reading - although i am very expressive. will try to keep it to a min but if i look confused or annoyed i am probably confused or annoyed, shockingly enough

Hi, I’m Wyatt, I have 3 years of debate experience in Congress and PF, but I’m also happy to judge LD. I also have 2 years of forensics experience. My paradigm is not super extensive, just some things to keep in mind.

ALL STYLES

• Be civil. Debate is open to anyone, an educational activity that expands your thinking and speaking skills. If you can’t put aside any prejudices you may hold for the duration of the round, then you don’t belong on the circuit, and I will be happy to tell you that.

PF

• I judge based on flow. Speaker points will not affect the outcome of the round. That said, if your speech is unorganized and sloppy, then that could make it harder for me to flow, which could lose you the round

• Logic and technical arguments will always move me more than conjecture and emotional anecdotes. They have their place but support your arguments with real evidence as well.

• The PF circuit is becoming more progressive. If. Theory and off case (Kritik) arguments are valid, but must be well justified and well linked.

• Don’t spread. Especially on the novice circuit.

LD

• Most of the same as PF above.

• Make sure you connect your values through the entire round, don’t put them at the beginning of your speech because you think it’s required, and then never bring it up again. Don’t assume that I understand your link to the value.

• LD is also becoming more progressive. Don’t be afraid to use Theory or Kritiks but still make sure that it’s airtight.

• Spreading is acceptable BUT:

• Start an email chain before your speech. You don’t get to start spreading as a way to stop your opponent from understanding you, If I can't understand your speech, or I don't have your case in front of me, I can't flow it.

• Include me on any email chain: wrice2327@gmail.com

CONGRESS

• I love congress.

• I want to see clash, bring up points that your fellow representatives have brought up. Congress is not a forensics event, so we need to be debating, not acting.

• While it isn’t a forensics event, speaking is important. You need to be organized and passionate about what you’re saying

• Do not speak for the sake of speaking. It is painfully obvious if your speech is a filler fest with no original content or clash. These speeches will not get you very far and will hurt your chances with me.

• It’s really easy to be rude or act superior in congress. Don’t.

Hello!

I am a former competitor in Informative Speaking, PF Debate, and POI. I have been judging since 2016.

In my judging, I look for thoughtful arguments, supported by research from credible sources. The competitor's speaking style and wording choices should communicate clearly their arguments and reasoning.

I am a second year parent volunteer judge of Congressional Debate and Public Forum, representing American Heritage School in Delray, Florida. I have judged Congressional Debate at TOC in 2023 and Public Forum online in 2022. 2023 is my first Nationals judging.

CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE

The first affirmative author should clearly and confidently outline the legislation and set the standard for the round. The first con speaker should be equally confident to present a counter-argument. A variety of clearly articulated pieces of evidence and quantitative and factual citations are always preferred to any vague, theoretical and qualitative statements. After the first two speeches, I look for additional evidence that augments the argument or a counter argument instead of re-stating previous arguments. Citing previous debaters and building on their key arguments adds value and shows that the speaker is alert and comprehends the legislation on a deeper level.

Ability to ask targeted questions is important. Quality of the question matters. Similarly, ability to carry the debate, answer concisely an to the question at hand and refer to the previous facts and metrics during the response is very important. In fact, this is the most important factor for me in judging the debator. When the Q&A time runs out, it usually becomes clear who held an advantage in that argument. Concise arguments win.

Presentation style matters also but to a lesser degree. It is finding that balance of being confident and assertive, yet not going overboard with screaming or trying too hard. Measured, confident delivery wins. Timing the speech close to the alloted time limit is a plus. Significantly short or a run-on speech is a negative.

Professional conduct and respect to other debaters and judges at all times is paramount. Ethics and values is table stakes. Else, you are out.

For a PO, I look for the ability to maintain order. The PO is in control of the Congress session. Show it. Run it and ensure that the rules are enforced at all times. Whiteboarding of debate topics and order of aft and con presenters for each legislation topic throughout the session helps.

I do not shake hands with presenters but try to maintain a positive, encouraging tone. Equal treatment to all participants.

Throughout each round, I maintain the count of key arguments, Q&A encounters, etc for each debator. At the end of each round, ranking becomes obvious based on the body of data gathered throughout the round for each participant. I usually make a fast ranking decision without major hesitations.

I am looking for content over delivery and maintaining cogent arguments. Be respectful to your peers in all interactions.

Debate:

- I would like to see:

- Money saved

- lives saved

- Great enunciation of words, and powerful young speakers

- Not a huge fan of spreading

- I love seeing new ideas

- Love seeing on case attacks as well

IE Forensics:

- I'm looking for the following

- Your own interpretation of the literature

-Good Memorization

- Understanding of the character

- Understanding of the entire literally selection

- Good characterization

- Projection

CONGRESS

I'm recently graduated and have been doing congress for 3 years now, w/ most of my experience at local or state, and only having competed in Nats 2023. My paradigm is pretty typical but informed by some personal experience.

For POs: Know that I value you, but you're not fighting an easy battle and you don't get an automatic 1! I've been there, I know what it's like. Of course, strive to make as few mistakes as possible and if you do, as long as you rectify it immediately, it's not a problem at all. If you can do that, you'll be rewarded in the ballot. Be professional!

For speakers: Please DEBATE! This isn't a speech category despite what the PF kids may have you believe. Engage with other people's arguments in clash, and if you're utilizing previous arguments then you had better frame them in a VERY different way that makes your point valuable and unique. Whether constructive or late-round, emphasize your impact, make me care about your point. (Remember: Re-hash is not valuable debate, please do not do this. Late-round adaptation for the sake of balancing debate will be HIGHLY rewarded, because it is by far the most difficult part of congress.)

Etiquette: Don't be the guy that shouts, no one wants to hear it. I don't care how good your point is, do not be insulting while you are delivering it. Being polite while firm is absolutely achievable, I know you can do it.

This is a category that's very near and dear to me, and it is a ton of fun to compete in and watch! Enjoy it :)

I have served as a judge for debate for four years and I prefer slower speech with proper short pauses.

For congressional debate, I would love to see new arguments that really advance the debate.

For speech, I prefer the structured approach with emphasis and rigor logic.