As a debate judge, my evaluation centers on the logical coherence of debaters' arguments, emphasizing the clarity and strength of claims supported by relevant evidence and sound reasoning. I closely observe their communication skills, considering articulation, persuasion, and non-verbal cues. Critical thinking is paramount, as I assess how effectively debaters engage with opposing viewpoints, showcasing intellectual agility and a nuanced understanding of the topic. The depth of research, demonstrated by well-supported arguments grounded in credible sources, adds weight to my evaluation. Additionally, I recognize the importance of time management, appreciating debaters who balance substantive content with adherence to time constraints. My approach prioritizes objectivity, devoid of personal biases, with a commitment to providing constructive feedback that fosters growth in the art of debate.

Dear Debaters,

I am a parent judge so please speak clearly and so I can understand what you are saying and why.

I will give full speaker points to all debaters who can do this.

I will ultimately vote for the team who can best use logic to support their case.

Good luck!

Parent judge with a couple of years of judging experience.

I will vote on any argument with a claim, warrant, and impact but you should error on the side of over-explaining things if you’re concerned I won’t pick up on something.

I determine speaker points based on clarity, creativity, research quality, rebuttal explanation, and organization.

I am a judge with little experience.

I do not like spreading; please speak slowly. Please clearly state contentions and signpost whenever possible. Please also try to stay on topic.

Good luck!

I am a lay judge, although I understand LD and the rules and expectations. I value truth over tech and I expect solid cases, and logical refs. I don't place too much emphasis on value clash. I don't want to see overly aggressive debate, be a good sport. I will not flow if you spread, I will not evaluate progressive argumentation. Weighing, impacts, and signposting with good evidence and solid refs will win you my ballot.

I am a lay judge, so PLEASE DON'T SPREAD. I won't flow/vote off of what I can't understand.

I prefer unique arguments over stock arguments.

Extend all arguments in summary and final focus and make it clear why you win the debate.

Three things I look for in 2nd half debate:

1. Frontlining: This is extremely important.

2. Weighing: Be sure to use comparative weighing instead of just saying you outweigh. Also explain why (i.e. We outweigh based on magnitude vs. we outweigh on magnitude because saving lives is more important than saving the economy.)

3. Extend your responses to your opponents case.

4. Do not be rude in cross.

Once again, do not spread.

Have fun!

I'm a first time lay judge, I have not judged any rounds before.

LD:

Make sure to thoroughly explain all your cards and warrants to make it easier to understand. Make sure to impact and explain the importance of those cards as well. I will be expecting you to time yourself during rounds.

Do not spread, I will not be able to catch what you're saying. Make sure you speak slower and enunciate. Always signpost so I know where you are on the flow, and clearly state the taglines and the card names.

Good luck!

Hi! I consider myself a Novice judge . Thus, please tailor to my level of experience .

Please articulate clearly and with good volume. I wear a hearing aide.

If you have the option, I prefer normal rate of speech vs rapid fire.

I value politeness.

Thank you.

I am a first year parent judge. Looking for clear arguments with good refutals and defense. Preferably no spreading. Good luck!

Hi, this is Ayesha Iqbal. I'm a parent judge and am excited and looking forward to being a judge. I have a little experience in judging, as I have been at multiple different tournaments over the past few years. I will be looking for kids who are persuasive with their content and delivery. And not rushing or speaking too fast, as it will help me to understand and judge better.

Hello,

I am a parent judge. Am looking forward to hear the arguments from the participants. Few preferences:

• Be respectful & polite to others. Unprofessional or disrespectful behavior for others will override all factors in final decision.
• Stick to your allocated time. I will not be keeping time. Participants can time their opponents.
• Quality is more important to me than quantity. You would want to be clear & concise with good points vs saying too many things which are hard to absorb.
• Numbers, facts & researches will strengthen your case. Making good arguments based on evidence and research are more important to me than speaking fast and making too many low quality arguments.
• Quality of questions & follow up questions will be a key parameter in addition to content and delivery style.
• Have fun!

I'm a parent judge as my daughter participates in debate.

kindly please send me your case before the round starts.

jysjin@yahoo.com

Don't Speak too fast but clearly. Definitely no mumbling. If I can't get your arguments down and fully understand what you're saying, then you have lost the round.

Be specific with your contention, warrants and impacts as I'll vote my ballot based on those.

I will not flow everything, but take notes.

Be polite, respectful and patient to the other.

I am a first time judge for LD so please be clear and elaborate on your points. I also don't have much prior knowledge on the resolution so explain your evidence and refutations to the best of your ability.

Hello, I am a parent judge. This is my very first time judging :)

Add me to the email chain too dwkim0212@hotmail.com

So, please speak VERY VERY slow.

I will vote on content NOT how you speak. Content is MOST important. I do not like loud speaking. Think of debate like a casual conversation.

Please keep your own time.

I will be expressive, so I will nod if I understand your arguments.

Remember, be kind, be nice :)

I want to see more relevant facts from debaters. Please make sure your facts are valid.

hey competitors!
I am a parent judge with some experience judging a debate round.
please keep in mind the following:
1. please please do NOT spread or rush thru your evidence. If I stare at the camera and stop flowing, you are speaking too quickly.
2. explain what you're saying clearly. pretend as though I have no topic knowledge whatsoever. do this well and i'm more likely to vote for your side.
3. please refrain from complex philosophical arguments, they're a little hard to understand.
4. be respectful to your opponent. Any xenophobic/misogynist etc comments will tank speaks and will probably lose you the round too, so just no.
LASTLY HAVE FUN :) debate is an educational experience - the ballot isn't the end of the world. if I vote for u, keep it up! if I vote against you, improve from ur mistakes and keep going!!!

I am interested in current events and politics, however, I don't have very much experience judging so please speak slowly in round and in crossfire. Please be polite in round, I will dock your speaker points if you are rude to anyone.

Please emphasize the important points of your speech at the end as I don't have much experience flowing.

Thank you, and the most important thing is to have a good time!

I am a parent volunteer judge for Dougherty Valley High School.

I have no experience with judging and I do not know anything about the different events.

I will award speaker points to the debaters based on how courteous, well-spoken, and confident you are. Do not be rude to your opponents or anyone else in the debate, or else you will definitely lose points. Try to avoid jargon and speak slowly so that I can understand your points.

Try to outline exactly why I should be voting for you. I want to know what your main points are and why they are more important than your opponents.

I will try to note down the important points, but I will not carefully follow every part of the debate.

Try to use as much evidence as you need to get your point across, but I want to hear your reasoning as well. Do not only use evidence.

Make the impacts of your arguments clear. I want to understand how your arguments will affect the world around us.

I prefer aggression in cross-examination, but be polite.

I value the quality of your persuasion over the truth behind your arguments, but that does not mean that you can make anything up. As long as the reasoning is logical enough, then I will consider your argument.

Most importantly, I want to see you have fun in the round.

Hi everyone,

My name is Namrata Nanda. I’m a lay judge and I’ve been judging both speech and debate for a year or so for DVHS. I’m familiar with the format of PF and its rules. I have also judged speech and Parliamentary Debate, and I have a daughter who does Public Forum. Here’s the basics of what I want to see during a round:

Speaks:

Please do not spread! I cannot stress this enough. I’m taking off speaks for anyone who spreads. Like I said, I’m a lay judge, so the clearer you are, the better ????

Ethics:

Just be respectful to one another. If someone is being racist or sexist, it’s an automatic win for the other team and I’ll will be forced to report.

How to win:

Tech>truth

As mentioned above, be respectful and talk clearly so I can understand. Cover both sides well. I tend to vote off weighing, so make sure it is explained well! If your opponents drop a point or a response, say that in your speech so I can make note of it.

Timing:

I’ll be timing your speeches, but you should also be timing yourselves. I allow for a 15-second grace period, and if you go over that I won’t hesitate to interrupt and cut you off. If your opponent goes over the 15 seconds, you can cut them off as well, I won’t take off speaks.

CX:

I don’t mind if you’re talking over each other, but don’t say anything inappropriate. I don’t flow cross or pay close attention to it, but do what you need to get your point across (I won’t judge based on cross).

Debate terminology:

Again, I’m a lay judge, so I’m not too familiar with debate terminology. If there’s anything you think I won’t understand, feel free to call it out and explain it to me.

FF2:

If we’re in the second final focus and your opponent brings up new evidence, just tell me right after the round and I’ll take it into consideration when I’m writing my RFD.

RFD:

I’m not going to give my RFD immediately after the round ends, I will need time to decide and give feedback.

Lastly, have fun guys! I’m looking forward to judging everyone. Good luck!

Hello Competitors!

I am a parent judge with limited experience judging a debate round.

Please keep in mind the following:
1. Please please do NOT spread or rush . I like to write down points, if iam not then you are speaking too quickly.
2. Explain what you are saying clearly. Pretend as though I have no topic knowledge whatsoever.
3. Be respectful- don't say anything racist, homophobic, sexist, ableist, etc.

4. If possible please add me to your email chain- narrapradeep@gmail.com

LASTLY GOOD LUCK & LETS ALL HAVE FUN

(He/Him)

I am a first time judge. I will vote based on the quality of reasoning, clarity of thought, and clear diction.

Hello, I am Sameena. For judging purposes I'm best considered a Flay Judge. Add me to the email chain using sameena_yp@yahoo.com.

Preferences:

1. Please do not speak too fast as it can be difficult to understand and I cannot understand any spreading. You should always be clear over being fast. Finish your speeches on time with a 7 second grace period.
2. You should be providing signposting and off-time roadmaps so I can pay close attention to the debate and to help me flow easily.
3. Make sure you send me the speech docs before the round using my email (sameena_yp@yahoo.com) as I tend to be hard of hearing.
4. I cannot assess progressive justification and forms of argumentation (T, Theory, Kritiks, etc.), so I kindly request you do not read it as I won't assess it.
5. I have not done much research on this topic so please do not assume I have prior knowledge.
6. Let me and your opponents know when you are taking prep time.
7. You should not interrupt, cut off, or be disrespectful to any of your opponents whether in a speech or during crossfire. Speaker points will be docked in any case for this behavior and anything racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. will not be tolerated.

Make sure to have fun, relax, and do your best!

I emphasize judgement based on the merits of the argument over the appearance of the debaters. I assess the speeches to get an understanding of how knowledgable the debater is on the topic; and I assess questions based on relevancy to the points made and furtherment of the argument. I value the ability of a debator to conduct a constructive, well-organized and vigorous argument, while maintaining respect for the opposing debators/teams viewpoint. This sometimes means weighing the pros/cons of an opposing argument rather then outright dismissal.

I am a parent judge with experience in a few tournaments. I am looking forward to respectful debate rounds where you clearly and comprehensively explain your arguments with creditable evidence/sources so I can flow the information properly to fairly evaluate the rounds. I might ask for your evidence cards after the rounds to check on the sources. I would prefer you debate with a reasonable pace, not too fast, so I can catch all your points accurately. Avoid running circuit arguments or spreading as I will most likely not be able to comprehend your points to judge.

Please use this email for speech docs and whatever. vrivasumana@tgsastaff.com

OK here's the deal. I did policy debate for 4 years in high school and two semesters in college (once in 2007 and recently in 2016 in Policy Debate). I have coached Public Forum for the last 12 years at various schools and academies including but not limited to: James Logan High School 17-18, Mission San Jose 14-17, Saratoga High School 17-19, Milpitas High School 17-present, Joaquin Miller Middle School 15-present.

Judged Tournaments up until probably 2008 and have not been judging since 2019. I judge primarily public forum rounds but do feel comfortable judging policy debate as it was the event I did in high school (primarily a policy maker debater as opposed to K/Theory) I also judged Lincoln Douglas Debate a few times at some of the national tournaments throughout california but it was not a debate I did in high school. For me my philosophy is simple, just explain what you are talking about clearly. That means if you're going to spread, be clear. If you are going to spread in front of me right now, do not go too fast as I have not judged in awhile so I may have hard time catching certain ideas so please slow down on your tags and cites. Don't think speech docs will fix this issue either. Many of you are too reliant on these docs to compensate for your horrible clarity.

Public Forum: please make sure Summary and final focus are consistent in messaging and voters. dropped voters in summary that are extended in final focus will probably not be evaluated. I can understand a bit of speed since I did policy but given this is public forum, I would rather you not spread. talking a bit fast is fine but not full on spreading.

UPDATE as of 1/5/24: If you plan to run any theory/framework arguments in PF, please refer to my point below for policy when it comes to what I expect. Please for the sake of my sanity and everyone in the round, slow down when reading theory. There is no need to spread it if you feel you are winning the actual argument. Most of you in PF can't spread clearly and would be put to shame by the most unclearest LDer or CX debater.

Policy wise:
I am not fond of the K but I will vote for it if explained properly. If I feel it was not, do not expect me to vote for it I will default to a different voting paradigm, most likely policy maker.
-IF you expect me to vote on Theory or topicality please do a good job of explaining everything clearly and slowly. a lot of times theory and topicality debates get muddled and I just wont look at it in the end. EDIT as of 1/28: I am not too fond of Theory and Topicality debates as they happen now. Many of you go too fast and are unclear which means I don't get your analysis or blippy warrants under standards or voting issues. Please slow the eff down for theory and T if you want me to vote on it.

LD:
I will vote for whatever paradigm you tell me to vote for if you clearly explain the implications, your standards and framework.
-I know you guys spread now like Policy debaters but please slow down as I will have a hard time following everything since its been awhile.

I guess LD has become more like policy and the more like policy it sounds, the easier it is for me to follow. Except for the K and Theory, I am open for all other policy arguments. Theory and K debaters, look above ^^^^

UPDATE FOR LD at Golden Desert and Tournaments moving forward. I don't think many of you really want me as a judge for the current topic or any topic moving forward. My experience in LD as a coach is limited which means my topic knowledge is vague. That means if you are going to pref me as 1 or 2 or 3, I would recommend that you are able to break down your argumentation into the most basic vocabulary or understanding of the topic. If not, you will leave it up to me to interpret the information that you presented as I see fit (if you are warranting and contextualizing your points especially with Ks, we should be fine, if not, I won't call for the cards and I will go with what I understood). I try to go off of what you said and what is on your speech docs but ultimately if something is unclear, I will go with what makes the most sense to me. If you run policy arguments we should be fine (In the order of preference, policy making args including CPs, DAs, case turns and solvency take outs, Ks, Topicality/Theory <--these I don't like in LD or in Policy in general as explained above). Given this information please use this information to pref me. I would say DA/CP debaters should pref me 1 and 2. anyone else should pref me lower unless you have debated in front of me before and you feel I can handle your arguments. Again if its not CP/DA and case take outs you are preffing me higher at your own risk. Given many of you only have three more tournaments to get Bids (if that is your goal for GD, Stanford, Berkeley) then I would recommend you don't have me as your judge as I would not feel as qualified to judge LD as I would judging most policy rounds and Public forum rounds. Is this lame? kinda. But hey I am trying to be honest and not have someone hate me for a decision I made. if you have more questions before GD, please email me at vrivasumana@tgsastaff.com

For all debaters:
clarity: enunciate and make sure you are not going too fast I cannot understand
explain your evidence: I HATE pulling cards at the end of a round. If I have to, do not expect high speaker points. I will go off what was said in the debate so if you do not explain your evidence well, I will not consider it in the debate.

Something I have thought about since it seems that in Public Forum and even in other debates power tagging evidence has become an issue, I am inclined to give lower speaker points for someone who gives me evidence they claimed says one thing and it doesn't. If it is in out rounds, I may be inclined to vote against you as well. This is especially true in PF where the art of power tagging has taken on a life of its own and its pretty bad. I think something needs to get done about this and thus I want to make it very clear if you are in clear violation of this and you present me with evidence that does not say what it does, I am going to sit there and think hard about how I want to evaluate it. I may give you the win but on low points. Or I may drop you if it is in outrounds. I have thought long and hard about this and I am still unsure how I want to approach this but given how bad the situation is beginning to get with students just dumping cards and banking on people not asking questions, I think something needs to be done.

anything else feel free to ask me during the round. thanks.

I don't particularly have extensive experience in debate, however, I have judged a few tournaments, mostly PF and LD. Please absolutely do not spread. Also in events with cross-x, I prefer less rapid fire style questioning. I really value signposting and clear voter issues. Please be respectful to your opponents. I'm willing to believe any argument in the round as long as it's properly backed up and defended.

I am not a flow judge really, so ideally if we can steer away from spreading that would be preferred. Can definitely have some speed but obviously within reason. If you have your case in a Speechdrop that I can follow that would make my life a lot easier however not a requirement. In terms of in-round behavior not a big fan of passive-aggressive behavior (i.e. snide remarks you may think are said under your breath but everyone can hear you) so please be polite, and play fair. Any problematic or ill-mannered behavior will cause me to give the ballot to your competitor.

How I approach judging a debate round is mostly on how well someone delivers their position. It is noticeable when a presenter invested time in research by citing multiple sources and being ready and able to answer their opponent's questions or to counter points. Speaking with clarity and regular speed is helpful to capture all the points.

Hello, 

As a novice judge , i prefer the below  

1. I value more probable impacts than impacts with large magnitude
2. Be respectful of your opponents
3. No spreading or talking very quickly
4. Avoid using many debate jargons
5. Speak Clearly

All the very best !!!

Hello all,

This is my criteria for judging.

1. Speak clearly, do not speed. If I can't get your arguments down and understand what you are saying then you have lost the round.

2. I like empirical evidence - you will not win the round by trying to win an emotional argument.

3. I like a well-thought-out/planned case that makes sense logically - I like to be able to connect the dots.

4. Do not be rude. Screaming, belittling opponents, eye-rolling, head shaking, and showing general contempt is not acceptable.