hi, I do parli with Ryan. I don't like it when people are too aggressive or speak way too fast. Also please have introductions before your speeches. I prefer if u don't run theory because I don't really know about it but your choice. POI's and questions are good but don't be rude and ask too many. make sure you organize your case well and uh just think of me as a lay judge, I'm not sure what else to include here so ye gl hf!

truth > tech

i will flow, but i will also factor confidence in arguments and depth of knowledge

if you run theory explain it well

no Ks

signpost

link/impact out args

please be respectful of your opponents -- no heckling/excessive facial expressions

Do parli, she/her

overall:

please dont be too aggressive

Content:

signpost please

please be somewhat organized during speeches (ex. case then rebuttal, vice versa, etc.)

Crossfire: please let your opponent have at least 1 question

I don't know any other debate structures

hi my name is juhi!!

GROUND RULES- no discriminatory language, no racism, sexism, etc.-- auto-lose and 0 speaks

ways to get 30 speaks!!

- if youre funny and i laugh at ur joke

- if you make an interstellar, lotr, or marvel reference or star wars obv

- SING IN UR SPEECH or dance

DEBATE RELATED!!!

- prefer clash, tech over truth

- warrant all ur claims

- condense in the rebuttal speeches

- vote neg on presumption

0 SPEAKER POINTS IF U SAY RYAN IS THE BEST- NO SPREADING FALSE INFORMATION

I do Lincoln Douglas debate as my main event at Leland High School, and Original Oratory as my second event. I have also done Congress in the past. (she/her)

Speech and debate is a great activity and something that I am passionate about, so I hope you can also take away knowledge and public speaking skills, regardless of results! Please be a respectful and supportive competitor, I will take note of any abusive or rude behavior in round.

Speech:

Good speaking speed, with a consistent and appropriate volume, please project your voice!

Speech content that makes sense and is well structured

Anything that is unique and can help me learn something new

Let me know at the start of the round if you would like time signals, and for what times/how often

Natural walking/pacing and gestures, but depends on event of course

Debate:

General:

Spreading is okay, but don't go too fast.

More clash is more interesting.

Cross X or crossfire with a deeper purpose, try asking questions that can connect well to your rebuttal.

Strong and logical arguments and impacts.

All cards should be cut properly, no tricks, etc.

Try to analyze arguments for logical rebuttals with your evidence.

No abusive arguments or burdens/observations if applicable.

Well-organized rebuttals and good weighing are appreciated.

Other:

Theory/Shells are not preferred (unless calling out abuse in round), as I am not as familiar with this kind of argumentation, though do explain everything well if you choose to run them.

Kritiks are okay, though explain the reason for using and why it is better/more necessary than clash specific to this topic.

Let me know if you have any questions! Good luck!

hi everyone! i'm eunwoo (she/her) & i've been competing in parliamentary debate for three years now. i have little to no experience with other debate events (ld, pf, policy) but will do the best i can while abiding by the flow.

some general things to keep in mind:

- offtime roadmaps appreciated

- please signpost!

- weigh your impacts

- links must be clear & well-explained

- extend args

- please use content warnings when necessary

- speak clearly and slowly (may not understand spreading)

- i know basically nothing abt theory/Ks so do with that what you will

- be respectful at all times! absolutely no discriminatory rhetoric will be tolerated & will result in an automatic drop. this includes (but is obv not limited to) misgendering, sexism, racism, homophobia, etc.

debate is, above all else, an educational space. my role as a judge and your role as a competitor is to ensure that everyone is able to compete safely in an equitable, productive environment.

good luck & let's have a great round :)

important: any reference to taylor swift, david bowie, or dead poets society will earn u speaks

here's a large picture of andrew garfield from one of my fave movies, the social network. enjoy.

I like good debating where both teams are answering each other's arguments rather than ignoring arguments and presenting your own. Saying a lot of incoherent evidence without expanding on it or explaining it should also be avoided. Competitiveness is good but attack your opponent's arguments, not your opponent.

I've only seen/done policy debate.

Any mention against cheese automatically L30s. Any mention for cheese automatic win of the round (W30s).

If you condemn cheese or do not mention, L 20's. Say at some point why cheese is the greatest invention ever W 30's. If both teams mention how amazing cheese is, the team that comes up with more pros uses more creativity, and further indulging examples wins the round.

I do PF, am kind of a mid debater

any argument is fine, just make sure you read any trigger warnings if necessary.

Being clear and enunciating well is better than spreading.

Implicating responses, giving warrants, and sign-posting are all good. Also, please interact with frontlines/responses instead of just repeating yourself.

Extend your links and impacts in summary. I will not evaluate new stuff from 2nd summary and onwards,

Remember to do weighing.

1st summary must frontline

Defense is sticky. Meaning, if a team gives a response to another team, and that other team never frontlines or gives another response back, the team that gave the first response doesn't have to repeat their original response in later speeches, it "sticks" to the argument. That being said, this doesn't apply if the other team did give a response. In that case, provide some new analysis or make some implications if you want to interact.

No need to put me in the email chain, if u want me to look at evidence, you can just say it during round or after and I'll look at it.

This is my 4th year of LD, and I look forward to a good round!

General:

- I am a more flow judge, but still expect analysis and weighing. Debate isn't a video game, don't try to exploit rules to
"technically win" a round.

- I am more tech>truth, but if your argument strays too far from reality and doesn't logically make sense, I won't evaluate it.

- Don't go too fast, a bit of speed is fine but I can't flow spreading.

- Limit your use of debate jargon; I don't know all the terms out there.

Case:

- Extinction arguments will only be evaluated if they make sense and the debater can prove they are likely to happen.

- Keep your arguments topical.

CX:

- Be respectful in cross-ex and also don't misconstrue what your opponent said in cx in later speeches.

- You can cut your opponent off, but only if they have already answered your question sufficiently or misunderstood the question.

Weighing:

- Please weigh in later speeches: just because I'm more flow doesn't mean I know the context of your event's topic.

Theory:

- In my opinion, when you run theory arguments, you are essentially asking me as the judge to intervene in the round; I will only evaluate theory if it is reasonable.

- Any theory shell must have all the necessary sections: Interp, Violation, Standards, Voters, etc. Don't read an interpretation and a 3-sentence justification and expect me to buy it.

- I will not evaluate frivolous theory arguments.

PF

Speed is okay as long as what you are saying is understandable

Don't be toxic or unnecessarily aggressive

Have cut cards

Must collapse and weigh comparatively (Don't just say: lives are the most important, explain why lives are more important than a corn shortage)

Frontline in 2nd rebuttal

In order to win an argument, you must frontline ALL responses - do not just extend through ink

Extend warrants and card names w/ year (Ex: Smith 19)

Must extend in BOTH summary and final focus

Warrant and flesh out everything really well

I do not like progressive stuff at all unless there is a major violation that warrants it

rayan sengupta is a lifer. if you say he is a lifer, I will hack for you.

Name: Medha Nemani

I do policy and only policy, so I'm not that familiar with other forms of debate. I'm willing to try and adapt, just make sure to make clear explanations so I understand how to properly evaluate arguments. I want to make sure to be the fairest judge I can!

There's a difference between speaking quickly and outright spreading. I don't mind if you talk at a bit of a faster pace, but if you spread--I am now a parent judge who who will be relying on cross-ex to make their decision, so please don't spread.

Don't bring up new arguments in the rebuttals.

I like powerful intros, analogies, good rhetoric - aka anything that will capture my attention.

Please make sure to include Trigger Warnings/Content Warnings whenever necessary. I'm a person sensitive to certain things and 100% need the necessary warnings. If you are not sure whether to include a warning or not, feel free to ask me!

Please be respectful. I understand if you need to interrupt someone in cross-ex, but do it politely. There's no need to be too rash. Also be courteous throughout the entire round. Make sure to respect pronouns, use inclusive language and apologize if mistakes are made. It's important that the round is a safe environment for everyone.

Policy:

Truth > Tech

I love framework. Specify burdens and emphasize how I should be evaluating the round and why I should be doing so.

Please signpost. Otherwise, debates can get very confusing with flowing and just in general.

Impact calc is awesome and I love to hear it. Helps me to know how to vote and in the end, please specify why I should be voting for you and resolve the clash.

Wholesome:

Feel free to chat with me after round about anything! Debate, speech, your favorite TV shows, etc!

And of course, have fun!

I am a 10th grader at Leland High school and have been doing speech and debate since I was in fourth grade. I like to play chess in my free time and will consider adding speaker points if you make good chess references in your speech.

Don't panic, this is most likely your first tournament, and you will do well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For Debate

Keep it simple, no off-topic or irrelevant arguments at all, keep improbable impacts off the table. Make sure you combine good, clear speaking with understandable arguments

For Speech

Simple and clear, good modulation and enunciation, and a topic to learn more about.

Let's try to keep it fast, fair, and efficient.

P.S.

K's, theory, spreading CPs are all allowed and praised.

Tech>truth

I eval no case

only theory

I am a lay judge so please speak slowly and do not disrespect opponents!

(she/her)

hi! I am a sophomore in high school and this will be my second year of policy debate!

- I have done Duo, BQ, Oratorical Interpretation/Declamation, and Policy in these 2 years

Debate:

If it's not policy, just treat me like a lay judge that flows, because I'm not really familiar with other debate events.

I LOVE analysis, but in order to have that you've got to have a strong understanding of evidence. Also for the other way around, don't just read evidence the whole time, you've got to have analysis for me for it to be a sufficient argument.

I love love love pathos. And big picture analysis/overview-ish analysis is awesome. Basically, I want you to write my ballot for me, big picture, two world analysis, impact calc, etc. anything that will make my job easier/clearer to vote aff or neg.

I definitely weigh the last speeches/rebuttals more, so end your debate with a bang! Within the debate, make comparisons of each side and each side's arguments, and prioritize explaining why and which one is better or weighed heavier. Please explain any arguments in a way that makes sense, so I won't be lost, shuffling my flow papers, flailing in confusion :) and please please please have clash. If there's no clash, the debate literally isn't productive at all, and I will start crying in the corner and use a random number generator to vote for me

Please don't spread, yes, I can understand speaking faster, but if you go turbo speed on me, I'll start doing my ap euro homework. If you do bring up any circuity or fast arguments, please explain them in detail, and why I should vote for you on that, you don't have to go super in detail, just enough so that I can actually understand the debate :)

And last but not least, please be nice; i am a tabula rasa judge(blank slate), so I am open to all arguments on the exception that it is generally just blatantly false, or offensive.

I will not tolerate ableist, sexist, racist etc, any discriminatory behavior or arguments. We're all here to have fun, so just be a nice. person. please. I'm begging you.

anyway, i just want a super fun and educational debate that everyone can enjoy.

yall are awesome and have fun!

help paradigms are weird

Don’t be problematic.

I have 3 years of experience with Parli debate at Leland. Be organized, signpost, speak clearly, and weigh. I prefer on-case debate; please refrain from running Kritiks and only run Theory when it is absolutely necessary.

I vote neg because I hate change and aff because im positive. glhf

Hi! First of all, good luck and have fun! For novice debate, do whatever you practiced! Don't worry about the more techy parts of the debate!

A little bit about myself: I've done high school policy for 4 years now and a bit of public forum in middle school. I will flow your arguments so try not to drop any! I can tolerate speed, but please do not start spreading unless it is a circuit tournament (but I probably won't be judging that).

Be kind to everyone. I will not tolerate any rudeness or offensive comments.

General (updated for Novice Debate):

- I probably don't understand all the details/ins and outs of the resolution of your event (LD, PF, or Parli) - try not to use debate jargon that someone not well versed in the topic area might not understand (unless it was under the cjr/water/NATO/econ ineq topics)

- Try your best! You'll do fine <3

- I won't flow cx unless you bring it up in one of your speeches

- Read offense! if you only read defense, I'll be sad :(

- Weigh your impacts!

For policy (!!!):

- I will be flowing and this is the most familiar debate format to me, so please try to elaborate on your arguments.

- Give an offtime roadmap before you start (aka an order) so I can flow your arguments, otherwise I will just write them down based on how I hear them (and the debate might get messy and I might miss one of your arguments).

- Read AT LEAST the author and date of publication before reading cards.

- Signpost!

- Frame the debate for me! Make it clear to me how you want me to vote, otherwise, I will vote based on arguments and what I think is a better argument.

• net benefits?
• stock issues?
• any other f/ws?

- Make it clear what your plan is! I will try to only vote on arguments brought up in the debate, and if I don't know your plan, I cannot vote for you.

- I love smart solvency takeouts, but be sure to elaborate on how the plan links to that though!

- CPs should have a counterplan text and clear net benefit. DAs should have AT LEAST a link and an impact. I will buy uniqueness if worded well. T should have a definition, standards/violation, impact, AND why your definition is better. Ks are cool but I personally don't know too much about each k :(

she/her

-high speaks if you aren’t racist or rude

-I flow

-experience in pf, parli, and ld

I am currently a varsity public forum debater, but I have some experience in lincoln douglas.

Pf

- You may go as fast as you want with your speeches, but remember anything I do not catch will not be counted in the round.

- Do not run theory or values in the round I will solely be judging by the arguments given that are related to the topic.

- I do not flow but value cross exes. Be sure to be polite and let each other take questions.

- Make sure to extend your points in summary, and do not bring up new arguments in final focus.

Ld

- You may go as fast as you want with your speeches, but remember anything I do not catch will not be counted in the round.

- I will judge off your value and arguments be sure to weigh and tell me why you better fulfill your value criterion.

- I value cross's and will take it into account when judging the round.

- I will not be voting off counter plans unless the negation proves that it happens in the status quo.

PF at Leland High School for 3 years

- You can speak decently fast

- No extending through ink

- Extend everything in final focus

- You don’t have to extend full card names

- I don’t vote off cross but please be polite

- Make sure you weigh your impacts

- Don’t misconstrue evidence

- Please cut all your cards, it makes things much easier

- I’m not comfortable with theory

Thank you have fun!

Throughout my speech and debate career I have participated in a variety of events, including interpretation, platform, and debate: Original Oratory, Oratorical Interpretation, Duo Interpretation, Parliamentary Debate.

Platform Events

-If you are in a platform event such as Informative, OO or OA, you need to connect your examples, evidence and seven-minute moment (OO-specific) to your overall topic. Make sure to vary your volume, vocal inflection and variation when necessary. Your OO/OA/Expository should be memorable to your audience.

• Please do not include random gestures that do not have any meaning or evidence that does not refer back to your thesis/topic.
• I like puns and humor, but excessive comedy becomes boring.

Interpretation Events

-If you are in an interpretation event such as DUO, HI, or DI, please try your best to actually interpret your characters. For example, in a HI, if your character just discovered a magical wonderland, act surprised; if you are in DI and your character just experienced hardship or something immensely traumatic, show that visually. Duo partners should always be in sync/unison.

• Please make sure that your audience is able to differentiate all of your voices--your normal speaking voice and your character's(s) voices.
• While I do not have first-hand experience in spontaneous speaking events such as Extemporaneous or Impromptu, however, I am more swayed towards speakers who are able to construct a logical and organized argument. If you state your roadmap ahead of time, I will be able to clearly identify what your three main points are.

Debate

The only debate structure I am well-versed in is Parliamentary Debate---not Policy, LD, Congress or PF.

• I am not familiar with all theories, so please do not run them; if you do, you need to define/explain what they mean in the context of the debate.
• Please do not speak extremely fast.
• Respond to all of your opponent's claims--do not deflect them---and treat each other respectfully.

Don’t be too unclear, present under stable topics and arguments, be clear and considerate with what you are arguing, and just have and fun experience debating

Hey!

I am currently a varsity debater in LD at Leland, and I also have some experience in PF and Policy. I don't have any particular preferences, as long as arguments are well-explained and have impacting. I do not do circuit nor have experience with theory, K, spreading etc, so I would prefer not to judge it, but I'll try my best.

Look forward to a great debate!

If you walk up with a legit BQ case and make me listen to it, you get an auto 25.

email: jessicary06@gmail.com

Two years of experience with PF and Expos/Info

*If you are in a partner event, you MUST be astrologically compatible with your partner. I can sense it. If not, -1 rank for speech, -5 speaker points for debate

For speech:

if you give solutions in your info speech i will be very sad

For debate:

Speak slowly and explain your arguments well. If you start spreading then I will start crying.

pretend I am lay because I am probably tired at the moment (but I will flow)

- please signpost

- extend

- don't be rude

auto 30 speaks if:

- you show up in a banana costume or

- you show up in a frog costume

Background: PF Debater at Leland (c/o 26), minor speech and CA LD experience.

add me to the chain: jameesyu@gmail.com

TLDR: tech>>>truth. Debate is a game. I try to be tabula rasa. Debate however you want, I’ll adapt to you. If you are racist/sexist/homophobic/etc. -> L-25. Overall, treat me as a typical tech judge. The stuff below goes over how I typically view rounds.

Fundamentals:

· Collapse in 2nd rebuttal. You must respond to all turns on offense and defense on the argument you collapse on.

· Weighing can start whenever, but must be in First Final or 2nd Summary. I will not evaluate new weighing in 2nd Summary. I am cool with probability weighing. Weighing must be comparative or I will not evaluate it. It is up to YOU to tell me what weighing I should prioritize (Metaweigh), however if not done generally I default to Prereq/Shortcircuit > Impact Magnifier > Try or Die > Everything else (Probability, scope severity, etc.) Weighing is really just top level terminal defense, so it is not required but it is very good to have.

· I don't flow cross. If you want to get something from cross on my flow, you must mention it in a speech.

· Send a doc if you're going over 250 wpm. If you don't and I can't understand you, I will stop flowing.

· Signpost everything. Roadmap can be as simple as "Aff, Neg" or "My case, their case" as long as you signpost properly (unless you're reading offs, then I would like "1 off, 2 off, substance" or something like that.

· Turns must be implicated! If you don't tell me why I prefer your turn over their link, I will treat the turn as a disad. I don't care if FDI causes corruption if the opponents still win offense which saves 100 million people. Don't leave it up to the judge to intervene.

· If your opponent's evidence is miscut, call it out and I'll look at it. I will only look at evidence if I am told to in round. Evidence must be carded. If not, my bar for responses is super low. By the way, idc about parphrasing as long as you have a cut card to back up the rhetoric. This doesn't mean I'll hack against para theory.

How I make a decision: Look first at Weighing debate -> Look at Defense -> Look at offense (As long as you win weighing and offense you win).

On Progressive Args - I can and will evaluate them. My bar for responses to friv theory is very low. I generally default CI and no RVIs but it is up to you to tell me what I should say prefer for your round. Wining No RVIs does not mean your opponents can't win off the CI. If you are trying to determine the best norms in debate, then if their CI norms are better they should win.

For more info on how I evaluate rounds, some of my biggest mentors in debate are Aniket Mittal, Daniel Xie, Jeannine Yu, and Ananth Menon. You can look at their paradigms.

Post-round me if you think my decision was bad; As long as it is done respectfully I'm open for it. Speaks should average 27.5-28.5. If you are a good debater you'll easily get 29+ speaks. Lowest I'll prob go is 26. I'll disclose decision and rfd after round if the tournament allows.

Good Luck!