I did CX debate for three years in high school (Irma Rangel YWLS) mainly through the Dallas Urban Debate Alliance. I have also worked with DUDA and its students since graduating in 2016. I also have some experience with judging and participating in UIL tournaments.

I prefer clarity > speed to best follow your arguments and debate. A good debate is where you're engaging with your opponents arguments and effectively and clearly refuting their points with quality evidence. Clear, concise and well structured debates are best. You should be able to clearly summarize the debate and give a compelling RFD at the end. Creative and non-traditional arguments are welcome as long as they're effectively communicated. Although I love hearing creative arguments they can be difficult to follow if they're not delivered effectively and I do tend to lean toward straightforward and practical arguments.

I expect debaters to be respectful and debates to be civilized. Please refrain from using pretentious/condescending language when addressing your opponents arguments in speeches. I take this into account when assigning speaker points.

Besides that - I love debate and I love learning more from you all through judging ~ !

Hello! My name is Ari, and I'm a varsity high school debater at the Judge Barefoot Sanders Law Magnet. I am a senior. My email is arceoari@gmail.com

General Thoughts

Truth>Tech

I like it when teams can effectively communicate why they should win a round. Impact calculus is key. What are your impacts, and why do they matter?

I think that the job of debaters is to make my job to make a decision as easy as possible. Debaters should communicate effectively by using good organization, being loud, staying clear, etc. My RFD should look like, "I voted aff/neg in this debate because *2 to 3 lines from the 2nr/2ar*"

If the argument is important, I want it to be explained well, and have a lot of evidence. However, good analytics > bad evidence.

I think that clarity>speed, since speed comes with clarity. You can be fast, as long as you're clear. If you ever get too fast, I'll just say "Clear", and ask you to slow down. I won't mind if you are going fast as long as I've got a speech doc and you aren't completely unintelligible.

Case

Case debate is unfortunately underrated. I'm willing to vote on impact defense and smart solvency take-outs. Impact turns are cool.

Topicality

I default to competing interpretations, and I think that explaining the impacts to T is exceptionally important. However, I will say that I feel like I'm more willing to vote on topicality than the average DUDA judge.

Kritiks

While I'm not sure if DUDA MS has enough time to run kritiks, I will say that I like kritiks. I happen to like framework/impact debates rather than perm/link debates, if that makes sense.

Counterplans

I like counterplans, even abusive ones. For posterity's sake, I think that abusive CPs can easily be handled by smart permutations (read this for an example: https://www.debatemusings.org/home/stupid-cps-are-stupid).

With that being said, I love well thought out advantage CPs. I feel like a thought out advantage CP might as well be a case argument considering how much they interact on the flow.

Disadvantages

Zero risk of link is possible. I like specific links, and in-depth clash.

Hi I'm Sabrina :)

I am currently a debater at JBS Law Magnet

As a judge I just want to see arguments clash and overall the side that is argued more impactful. Any hateful speech will result in an automatic loss and low speaking points.

Any question- email me at Sabrinabhattara06@gmail.com

Hi I'm Eduardo Campuzano and I been debating for 5 years now. I want you to have both speed and clarity. If during the debate match you dropped an argument it will affect my decision in who wins.

Clarity vs. Speed

Understanding of the arguments

Organized

Engaging and persuasive communication

Refutation that is relative to the topic 

Teamwork

TAG '25

~4 years policy debate experience + some world schools

I will flow your round. If you want advice on flowing/ basic debate things, feel free to ask me any questions after the round is over if we have time. I will try to leave a detailed reason for decision on tabroom.

Talk as fast or as slow as you want. Please speak loudly enough for me to hear you (I will let you know if this is an issue). Also, be respectful to your opponents.

Hello Everyone My Name Is Janmil Garcia I’m A Competitor And Judger For DUDA Since 2019 And I’ve Had Experience In WSD And Policy with Policy Being for 3 years and WSD 6 months ???? I’m a Fun sand Energetic Person Who loves Competing In Debate

I'm pretty open to either side. Being a former debater, I can hang with fast speeds as long as clarity is not sacrificed. 1AC should have their pronunciation and speech time down, as this speech is pretty much the same across the season.
Dropped arguments get pulled across. Evidence-wise, all other things being equal, newest evidence wins if in direct conflict.

No new arguments in rebuttal speeches, except in 1AR to refute 2NC.

I will deduct speaker points and lower ranking for debaters who don't use all their cross examination time or leave too much speech time on the board (especially in rebuttal speeches!). You can always summarize your case and let me (the judge) know which points you are winning, which ones the opposing team dropped, and why I should vote for your side.

isaiah1415@gmail.com

I did policy debate at Townview Law Magnet & UTD. Minor experience in LD & World Schools. Currently work with the Dallas Urban Debate Alliance.

Make the debate what you want it to be. I like creativity, think outside of the box, take risks, warrant everything.

Im not partial to anything, nor do I not like to see any particular arguments.

I will be listening to you, not reading your docs.

Feel free to ask me any specific questions.

HS Policy Debate: 3 Years

College Policy Debate: 2 years

Ran mostly K leaning arguments when I debated. Open to anything being read in front of me.

I value two things in particular:

1) Explain to me why you won at the end of the debate, my favorite debates are the ones where the debaters write the RFD for me.

2) When debates turn into a question of which pedagogy should be preferred, I am very swayed by the transferability of one form of pedagogy over another outside of the debate round.

Feel free to ask any questions before the round starts!

• Understanding of the arguments
• Organized
• Refutation
• Reasoning
• Smooth Cross-Examination
• Engaging and persuasive communication
• Good presentation (speaking skills, etc)
• Teamwork

Guyer HS '16-'20

UT Dallas '20-'24

Put me on the chain: hmubarak at me dot com

I did four years of policy debate in high school, and I currently debate for UTD. I've been the 2A, the 2N, and the ins at various points of my career, and I mostly ran policy arguments.

For the 2023-34 high school topic, I know almost nothing about it. I'd appreciate a little more explanation on the acronyms, background, and key concepts that structure these debates.

Some random thoughts below:

Don't be rude unless you want lower speaker points. In the case of blatant racism/sexism/etc., I'll only drop the team if the opponent makes an argument about it, but the bar is pretty low for me to do so.

You don't have to take prep to send out the email, but please be prompt about it.

Please keep track of your own prep. I will also keep track, but don't rely on me.

I'm not the greatest at flowing so if you're super fast I'd prefer if you went at like 90% of your top speed.

Cross-X is binding, and I'd prefer if one speaker from each team speaks at a time.

If you're reading a K, unless it's like Cap or Security or something, please don't assume I know your literature base. I almost certainly don't.

Have fun! This activity has meant a lot to me over the years, and I truly believe that it has strong educational potential. Argue, argue well, and argue with passion.

For LD/PF:

I'm a policy debater through and through, so adapt the way you normally would when you have a policy judge in the back. I don't know much about the norms of your formats, so the more you can make the debate resemble a policy round, the more comfortable I'll be. This doesn't mean you have to speak at a million miles an hour, but it does mean I'm less receptive to philosophy debates and 2 minute long theory shells.

Speed or clarity?

I don't really have a preference as long as I can understand what you are reading. Just focus on your argument and getting through as many cards as you need for your case. I will be giving speaker point based on how you present the text and your familiarity with the text (read confidently and show that you know what you're reading). 

Open or closed debate?

Open unless DUDA tells me otherwise. My only condition is that the partner does not completely overpower and take over the cross examination time. 

In my decision, I will be deciding based on the arguments. Make sure that what you are reading answers your opponent's points while also bringing in new evidence or additional support for your argument. Make sure there is clash.

I am a first-year middle school debate coach. I am here to enjoy your ideas and arguments without personal or political judgement. I appreciate a clear analysis of why you should win in the final rebuttals!

Hello , I have judged several rounds and have a good understanding of debate theory and strategy.

When it comes to judging, I prioritize clarity, organization, and persuasion. I believe that a debater's job is to present a clear and convincing argument, and it's my job as a judge to evaluate how well they accomplish that goal. In my view, the most persuasive arguments are those that are backed up by evidence and logical reasoning, and that address the core issues of the debate.

I value fairness and respect in the debate community, and I expect all debaters to adhere to those principles as well. I also believe that the debaters should be civil and professional, both in their speeches and in their interactions with one another. Any instances of disrespectful behavior will be taken into account in my decision.

In terms of argumentation, I am open to all kinds of arguments, including policy, value, and fact-based arguments. However, I am not interested in hearing arguments that are discriminatory or disrespectful. I will not tolerate any form of hate speech or discriminatory remarks.

When it comes to evidence, I prefer quality over quantity. I value well-researched and relevant evidence that directly supports a debater's argument. Evidence that is taken out of context, misused, or irrelevant will not carry weight in my decision.

In terms of style, I appreciate debaters who are confident, articulate, and poised. However, style alone will not win the round for a debater. Substance and sound argumentation are key.

Finally, I believe that every round is a learning experience, and I encourage debaters to ask questions and seek feedback after the round. I will do my best to provide constructive criticism and offer suggestions for improvement.

I look forward to a fair and respectful debate. Good luck to all debaters!

Leroy Tamfu

Debater at BOMLA

6 years

Hi! I am an urban high school debater who is always ready to help. Debate is only what you decide to make it! - Evan Gilbert. AND YES, I QUOTED THE GOAT!

Debate the best you know how. I evaluate everything as long as you explain how I should. Every judge you meet is lazy. I am only lazy when I am in judge mode so spell things out for me., so I won't have to intervene as a judge. The goal is to ensure that debate becomes strong in MS to build the HS division. this means we are all on the same team. Bigotry, disrespect and lack of etiquette is L 25. This also means you can ASK ME QUESTIONS. Anything debate related I will answer to ensure you get better at the activity. Be confident! the fact you chose to be here displays courage so keep at it. All it takes to win is a clear and concise story of why I should vote for you based off of the args u presented. Knowing your case and understanding strategy on how exactly you go about that is key to winning all of your rounds.

CX is a game changer. Being able to use it to your advantage. You should be able to defend against this and use it at your advantage. When they ask you a vague question use that opportunity to really explain what you have to say. That is using CX to your advantage. Also, it's like a test of if you understand what you're reading.

Rebuttals are YOUR TIME to shine this means you have to use it to your advantage make the arguments you need to make to win and THAT's IT.

Prep is important make sure you time your speeches. So we can avoid going over the time limit of the 1AC and you're golden!

I've been a DUDA debater since 7th grade, and I've been judging debates since 9th grade. I'm well-immersed in this year's topic and I'm ready to give helpful feedback to any debaters who'd like it!