Hello! I am an experienced judge and I love judging debates. I value both the content and the presentation in debates equally. It is important that I am able to hear you and understand your arguments clearly, so please speak at appropriate pace. I prefer value based arguments and clarity in thoughts. Please summarize your arguments and rebuttal and voting rights at the end.

Hello I am Dominic DiGioia (they/them), I currently go to the University of Delaware. In High school I competed in Extemp, I look forward to being a judging all of you!

I am an old-school LD judge. I want a good value clash throughout the round. I loathe spreading; if I can't understand you, I will rely on your opponent to tell me what you said. If you call out drops, you must also give me impacts for them to have any weight with me. You can win my ballot with substantive philosophical arguments, and you can lose my ballot if you get mired in policy.

I am looking for topicality does the thesis of the affirmative really meet the standards of debate. I also look and see what evidence is being used and if it used effectively and not just some random piece of evidence that is biased. You see their is the subjective and objective facts in each debate. I also look at see when you quote evidence is up to date and plausible to support your thesis. I expect language to be respectful to each other if you are aff or neg. I do not like to use profanity in this educational setting. Do you use your time wisely? Does someone leave two or three minutes left in a rebuttal if so why? Doing crossfire do you answer questions properly or ask probing questions to help you win the debate. I value good speakers and good flow.

Aimee Sann Paradigm

Policy is a fascinating debate format! I love it, and I am still learning it. If I am your judge and you are sending emails, please include me: sanna@notredameprep.com.

1. Be organized. I prefer claims numbered, deliver tags clearly and with emphasis, roadmaps, and signposting. Otherwise, my flow will just fall apart. My flow will be on paper.

2. Lay out your framework clearly and don’t fail to say why you won. In the end, I need to hear what you believe carries the most weight in the round. How you met your burden. How the other side failed to meet theirs.

3. Don’t assume I know all the jargon. I have familiarity with most of it, but explanation matters.

4. Treat statistics with care. If there is clash on them, I will be attentive to your knowledge of how they are collected and how to measure their strength.

5. In Ks, I will be looking for specificity with reference to the AFF’s plan, and I will be listening for your alts.

I am a new judge, so I am not aware of much of the jargon surrounding debate. Please explain your arguments clearly and at a reasonable pace (don't spread). If I miss your argument because you are going too fast, it will not be flowed. Please remain kind and respectful in round.

Make sure you are timing yourself and keeping track. I will try to ensure that the timings are fair, but I am a new judge, so keep that in mind. Be clear and concise while maintaining your positions.

Be clear with your responses and evaluations. Point out any interp on evidence, and show why your evidence is valid. Don't get bogged down in FW or Definition debate if it doesn't affect the round. No need to share your cases with me, just speak clearly.

I consider Tech>Truth. Since I am new, please remain on topic. Do not run frivolous theory; I will drop you. I am also not too familiar with Ks. If there is an actual issue, make sure to show it clearly and ensure that it relates to the topic and the round. I'm pretty open-minded with arguments, but you have to show me the logic and the evidence.

Weigh, weigh, weigh. This should be a very significant portion in your summary and FF, and I expect to see some in Rebuttal as well. I won't flow cross but I will listen to watch for any issues. Draw attention to anything significant from cross in your speeches. No new arguments after rebuttal, and no new evidence in 2nd summary. Extend your links and respond to turns.

Overall, be nice and act ethically while defending your position. Don't confuse me as it will not help you win. I am a pretty lay judge.

This is my second year judging speech (all events), and first for PF debate. I will not judge based on my opinion and I do not get offended by the topic or any language in the content. However, I do expect everyone to be respectful to one another.

DEBATE

For PF, please note that I am a traditional judge and need you to speak slowly with very clear sign posts. The slower the better for me, but I also realize you have a lot of ground to cover.

I prefer PRO to sit to my left and CON to my right. Whether you face each other or forward to the judge is your collective preference.

If you keep your time, politely share with me and your opponent (for both the cumulative prep time as well as the timing for crossfire, rebuttal, etc.)

The better you are with roadmaps, signposts, and clearly pointing out drops and turns, the better I will flow your debate. In the summary convince me why you won and please be clear on your weighting and reasoning.

SPEECH

For speech, I tend to take a lot of notes, which helps me remember and distinguish you from the several competitors and go back through them all before final rankings are entered by me into the system. This also allows me to provide you more feedback if you are looking to improve your speech event, or know what portions were most successful.

Please let me know whatever timing queues you prefer and I will do my best to accommodate. This includes hand signals. I do not mind if you use your own timer, as long as your phone is otherwise off and it's just for the timer. I will keep track of time, and can provide that to you when you finish if you request it.

If you are double entered and need to leave after your event with me, just kindly excuse yourself before the next competitor begins their delivery.

I like to follow the scoring guidance on the ballots as best as possible and will consider all those criteria when doing the rankings.