My roll as you're judge is to be a tabula rasa, in other words, a "blank slate" so that all preconceived notions and biases are discarded pre-round. In general, I'll vote for whoever is most persuasive.

LD/PF/BQ

- Prefer trad over progressive arguments, but if you've got a good case feel free to run anything

- I'm not a line-by-line judge but please signpost so I can track your args

- Unless it's a K, or you have very different values, please don't waste time on the framework as most are similar and can be incorporated into each other

- I dislike spreading, but if you must please email me your case and slow down on important points that would you like to emphasize.

- Impacts are important, but not if your links are weak. If you want to run a global extinction impact please use strong evidence and analysis to convince me why such a situation is likely enough for me to vote on it.

- Evidence is important, but please include plenty of analysis. I will accept evidence as true unless challenged and determine the winner upon who analyzes all the presented evidence (including that of your opponent) in the manner most favorable to their case.

Bottom Line: At the end of the day, I'm going to vote for whoever uses the best persuasion skills to convince me of their case. My name is Ethan and I look forward to judging your round.

What I look for while judging, in a nutshell:

Be respectful to your opponents or fellow participants, speak clearly and not too fast, cite your sources and give evidence to back your statements.

I am so impressed that you are here, participating in this. Have fun!

The purpose of debate and speech is to change minds, hopefully in the pursuit of making a better world for all of us.

Changing minds is an art and a science.

Is it possible to speak beautifully and convincingly, but the content of your of argument is utter nonsense? Yes, unfortunately.

Is it possible to speak with absolute truth on your side, to be verifiably right in every way, but to make those you would convince feel confused? Yes, unfortunately.

I think great speaking employs truth artfully to help us understand each other.

I'm a sophomore at the University of Utah, and I competed in PF for 3 years in high school and was my team's Debate Captain my senior year. I also competed in Big Questions occasionally and have judged plenty of LD, so your round is in good hands.

Impacts > warrants (IMPACT CALC!!!! Weigh! Your! Impacts!)

Tech > truth (I don't care what you argue as long as you can argue it well; make sure your links are solid.)

I value topicality. If your argument is not topical you probably will not win the round. Please read the resolution carefully before you write a case on it. Literally my biggest pet peeve is non-topical arguments.

Analyze your evidence. Don't just read it, tell me what it means and why it matters.

SIGNPOST! Tell me what arguments you are addressing in your speeches. Makes my job so much easier and your round will go much smoother.

Utilize your framework throughout the round. Don't spend time telling me that your framework is better than your opponents, because I do not care - tell me how both your and your opponents' framework flows to your side. Framework should frame the round. Please actually tie your claims back to your framework.

VOTERS! Tell me why you won. I will take any voter you bring up into account. Utilize your final speech!!!

Be respectful. Debate is not an excuse to verbally abuse each other. Good sportsmanship still applies here.

I judge primarily based on flow, speaker points will be given for presentation and sportsmanship. I do not flow cross-ex, any points made in cross will not be flowed unless they're brought up in a later speech.

As your judge I'm simply just here to observe, your round is between you and your opponent. You direct and control the round, I'm just here to watch.

Hey y'all,

I participated in Public Forum debate throughout high school on the state and national level, and have considerable experience judging various types of debate.

I am comfortable with speed, as long as it's accompanied with clarity. I judge primarily off a balance of flow and impact calc.

Be respectful!! And have fun!

-Jonah

Speak clearly, make eye contact, be respectful to other team members. I will look for fact / logical based coverage by each team in the topics I judge.

Hi all, my name is Ella Nebeker and I have a background of speech & debate participation, with my main event being PF but I have also done a few rounds of policy and LD. I don't really have debate style preferences, but there are some things I will be looking for and general expectations.

Expectations:

-Be courteous and respectful to your opponent/ team mate

-Please do not talk over other people

-Try not to raise your voice to make your point

-Time yourself (but I will be keeping time as well)

-Speaking clearly and understandably is more important than speaking quickly

Things I will be looking for:

-Impacts are a big deal. You need to tell me why your impact is more important in the context of the round and why you can provide for your impact better than your opponent

-Don't bring up framework if you plan to drop it later on, it's just a waste of time

-I do tend to judge off of the flow, so keep that in mind

-Cards should have analysis attached to them, I need to understand the purpose of the evidence in context of your argument

-Signpost! Voters especially are very helpful as a weighing mechanism

-Exclusionary strategies will cost you speaker points/ the round

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask :)

Tabula Rasa, I believe that in creating a more fair and equitable debate round, putting my personal bias into how the round should be weighted would create more obstacles than are necessary, and creates a culture in debate wherein there is no evolution. That also means that emphasizing voters is critical. Present the reasons you won. If you have time, emphasize at the end of every speech what matters most thus far in the debate.

Speed is fine, just make sure to slow down a little on key components to help my flow. I appreciate road mapping. Feel free to time yourselves (I will keep time as well).

If during cross ex, an answer is being given when the time is up, I will allow a short answer past the time being up if both sides agree. I do not flow cross ex, although you must adhere to what you state in cross, in respect of fairness.

I have judged every form of debate and speech, and have been judging since 2005. My main events were Policy and dramatic interpretation, but tried most events.

All forms of debate in my view should be founded primarily on the participants personal thoughts, logic, arguments and persuasion or team as it applies to the event being judged.

Participants original thought and presentation reasoning/arguments receive highest point values in my judging, while reading quotations, assertions, statements (though cited) via electronic devices verbatim do not. This is not to suggest that citations, quotations and so forth should not be used rather that how they are used, and when in the event they are used does matter.

All quotations, assertions, or statements of "others" without proper citation of source are questionable in my view.

I do not judge based on the volume of words given. Elocution matters! I do judge on the quantity of the words presented and do not see debate as a reading contest.

Eye contact matters - look at the judge(s) and other participants.

Speak clearly and loud enough to be heard by all. Move closer to me (the judge) if needed.

The speed of the response to debate points does not matter as much as the appropriate response with clarity (citations are okay).

Personal Perspective - All who participate are Winners, and I encourage all to persistent in debate as the skills will serve you in your future life. Competitions by there nature are binary with specific winner/loser, but your involvement and personal success in competing is not. You win by competing and doing your best.

Time violations are considered and monitored by opponent or chairman as applicable.

Assistant coach for Davis High School, I am laid back judge with lots of experience debating and judging.

The only thing I care about is that you signpost throughout your speeches and give me voters in your final speech, Everything else is free game.

If you want something from me to perform better to my style of judging, I really am a sucker for clear logical structure. I am awful at visualization, so if you clearly establish your line of thought in regard to your case and responses to your opponent for me to write down I will be SO happy. It is two birds with one stone, If you put emphasis on clarity, you are a stronger debater and you have made evaluation of the round easier in your favor.

Have fun

If you have any questions about my RFD, critiques, or how I interpreted the round feel free to send me an email: crisafer.js@gmail.com