I am a judge who values clear and concise arguments that are well-supported by evidence. I believe that debaters should focus on the quality of their arguments rather than the quantity. I prefer debaters to speak at a moderate pace, allowing me to follow their arguments and evaluate them effectively. I expect debaters to be respectful and courteous towards each other and avoid using any offensive language or tone. I will evaluate the round based on the strength of the arguments presented, their relevance to the topic, and how well they are supported by evidence. I will also consider how effectively debaters respond to their opponent’s arguments and how well they can refute them. Finally, I will evaluate how well debaters can summarize their arguments in their final speeches.

I prefer concise arguments with well-supported by evidence. I value the quality of the arguments rather than the quantity, and would like debaters to speak at a moderate pace. Please remember to have fun, and I am excited to hear your arguments!

· Speak confidently and clearly

· Respect other team while they are speaking

· Don’t stress & have fun

Hey y'all

A quick recap about me, throughout my four years of high school, I debated in PF (freshman and senior year), LD (sophomore), and Policy (junior and senior year). triple homicide. Second speeches is my life I love second speeches.

Cards:

If you have a card, it is your opponent's job to prove to me that the card is false or unreliable. until then, I will assume that the card is true.

please don't take 5 years to send out a card. if it take you longer than 1 min then you need to move on

Public Forum:

• I am not super strict on time, but since it has the shortest speaking time, I would prefer for everyone to keep up with the time given
• remember it is not about who can make the best policies for me it is about who can prove to me that their way of life is better.

Lincoln Douglass:

• Don't hate me but I only did one year, so some of the terms may have been forgotten about
• Timing can get confusing for me, so I would prefer if you remind me about the timing in LD

Policy:

• I LOVE POLICY DEBATE
• if you are going off-case let me know. I take away speaker points if there is a lack of organization.
• if you are one of those teams that give 1,000,000,000 off cases, then you will see me give you a major side-eye. (LOL)

overall:

I will give my RFD.

Everything I say in the round will be put in TAB.

Have fun you humans.

I’m a parent judge since 2020, with no debating experience of my own. I'm looking forward to seeing you debate.

The clarity of your arguments will be the most important thing. Make sure that I can understand the structure you're following. The terms of art that you use in discussing debate among yourselves are probably less familiar to me, so plain language at a reasonable speed is best. I’m not likely to vote on something that doesn’t make any sense to me.

Impacts are what matter, and not the amount of arguments. Make sure everything you want me to vote for is extended, and important moments in crossfire are explained in speeches.

I will try to keep track of time including prep, but please make sure to do so as well.

Please keep in mind that in a virtual debate, true crosstalk in a crossfire usually means that I can't hear either speaker, so do your best to allow your opponent to finish before responding.

Have fun, try to come out of the round smiling.

Background: I am a new parent judge. I'm a scientist and have a natural bias towards arguments grounded in evidence as well as arguments that bring together multiple reinforcing ideas. Arguments that are strong in technique but completely unhinged from widely accepted knowledge can be difficult for me to appreciate to the same extent as a professional advocate, such as a litigator or politician. That said, in addition to being grounded in fact and logic, strong arguments for me become especially persuasive when they are easily relatable to the debaters and judges as human beings.

Always be courteous to your opponents, team mates, and judges, speak clearly, and explain your terms.

I won't need to see evidence unless the arguments about the evidence's strengths or weaknesses have become unclear. In that case I will look after the debate as part of judging.

I am a parent judge in PF who joined in 2023/24, and who has enjoyed listening to a number of passionate exchanges this season.

As a physician scientist, I am impressed by logic and reason. You impress me even more if you demonstrate humanism and appeal to universalist values which have always been true and will always be true - long after our zeitgeist values, however passionately held, have faded.

On an operational level, I am less able to award points for detailed citations - trust me, I will not be able to factcheck yours in real time! I understand that this presents a challenge: You ought to seek evidence for bold claims, of course - we demand it in medicine!- but I as your judge will not be able to critically assess the quality of your evidence during the hour we are together. What I am able to critically assess, however, and what I value highly is your ability to respond to opposing claims as well as real-time criticisms of your own claims: A PF debater who is able to honor an opponent’s argument, and then effectively rebuts it, will impress me - and score high.

Hello! I am a special education teacher at the high school level. I am a new judge and because of that I don't have particularly strong opinions about how students debate. This may change with some experience! I do know that I like when students address their points clearly and their arguments have an order to them. I value facts and evidence. I don't like when students speak so quickly that it becomes difficult to follow their argument.

I am a flay judge with a little over 10 years experience judging and coaching. I didn't do debate in high school or college, but I have really enjoyed it on the judging side, and I have learned a great deal. Having said that:

1. I prefer arguments to technicalities. Debates about debate are not great.

2. If you are participating in an evidence-based event, do give evidence, and be clear and specific when you cite it.

3. Clash with the opposing arguments; more often than not I end up deciding which arguments I PREFER, rather than which ones I believe.

4. Signpost as you go. It helps me keep my flow organized.

5. Keep your impacts at the forefront.

6. Give me voters and weigh.

7. Ask questions during CX, and engage with your opponents, don't just give more speeches.

Good luck, and have fun.

Hi,

I am new at judging at school forums. That said I do get to listen and judge on a lot of topics at work - judgements that have to be made based on facts and presented such that there is no conflict in the information presented and the citations / data / sources. Well formed arguments rooted in evidences and backed with sources are what I will be looking for in the content you present. While debating I do believe that respect to opponents and engagement with audience are a basic requirement and I hope to see you do well on that requirement.

Wish you the very best and good luck at shining on the stage.

I have several preferences regarding speaks:

• Speak at a measured pace - Clarity over speed. It is not the amount of content covered but the idea is to convince the judge of your arguments - Ensure that your debate is comprehensible - Speak with volume to modulate your tone in conveying your arguments effectively - Appropriate eye contact with your opponents or judges as required
• My preferences for argument - I favor strong and logical arguments supported by facts and warranting - Extend your warranting - I judge the rationality of an argument based on your impact, but the entire case must be cohesive - I will vote for the larger impact only if the point is warranted properly and well articulated - Strong impactful arguments made by opponents left unresponded to will go in your opponents' favor - As a judge, I won’t contribute my knowledge to this debate and will solely judge on information presented to me. Make sure to address your opponents' arguments appropriately. - Speaker points do not affect my judging decision, but I prefer a well-articulated argument conveyed effectively.
• What not to do - Do not source battle unnecessarily, argue, and extend with your warrants. Rather convey your arguments with a force of rationality. - Do not belittle opponents' sources - Evidence should support your arguments, not arguments supporting evidence. The point is not to sprinkle pieces of evidence but to weave those into your story with consistency. Best of luck and most of all enjoy the debate!!

I have no prior experience in speech and debate. I have never competed and only recently started judging. I understand basic debate argumentation but am still learning specific jargon and technicalities. Please try not to speak too fast but I understand that this is a space that requires time constraints. I want to hear any kind of arguments that you have prepared. Please clearly extend your arguments throughout the round, with author names or taglines so I know exactly what you’re extending. I am excited to see what all of you have to say, but please be respectful of each other in round.

This is my first year judging. I have an academic and business background and am involved in theatre.

I am a lay judge, so please don’t push K arguments.

Speak at a lay understandable pace, enunciate. Please don’t spread.

Very helpful for you to weight contentions during focus.

Love turns.

I'm a new judge to LD and prefer trad cases, I listen for structure in argumentation. Make sure your contentions are clearly stated and backed. Link the contentions to your Value/Criterion or Framework. Talk clearly, specify and debate to achieve your value criterion.

No spreading.

I am not very comfortable with progressive arguments. You may try to run prog, but make sure you have a good line of reasoning.

Make sure to give voters and/or impact weighing so I can more easily vote for the round.

I expect all debaters to treat their opponents with respect. Above all, come with a sportive spirit and have fun.

Hello, everyone! I am an attorney in Philadelphia and a Temple Law School graduate. I am a new judge, and also new to high school debate. As such, I do not have many preferences. However, I will value clear, concise, and organized arguments. I will also expect all debaters to be respectful toward each other. Most importantly, have fun!

I'm a Debate parent, judging in my third year. Public Forum mostly.

Pros

• uniform speed that is intelligible to fully appreciate your views
• RELEVANT evidence-based assertions show me you know what you are talking about and not just filling air time.
• Have fun while learning and improving-this shouldn't be a stressful burden.
• Respectful discourse with your opponents or you will lose points, and my favor.

Cons

• rude condescending tone or mannerisms
• trying to take 5-10 second preps repeatedly
• focusing on cards obsessively or trying to game your opponents instead of just debating
• asking if I'm just a Mom judge
• talking excessively over your opponents in cross
• spreading prevents me from understanding you and giving you credit for your positions

This is my second year as a public forum debate judge and one of the most enjoyable volunteering activity to do.

I appreciate careful and reasonably-paced speaking, good evidence and knowledge of your sources. It is important to remember that not all sources are created equal so one should be willing to carefully evaluate them. The date of a source is also equally important --- eg, it has current up-to-date information or it is a classic or comprehensive source that has not been superseded.

I am a researcher myself and an academician for over 20 years, and I value evidence and sources as well as argument. In my debaters, I am looking for strategic communications.

I find that there is plenty of time during the round for teams to present arguments cogently while supplementing it with evidence. Usually the debate gets repetitive towards the end. I strongly recommend my debaters to summarize the case but don't rush and absolutely no need to be repetitive. Make eye contact with me and convince me with good evidence and a carefully made argument. Stay professional and pay close attention to your body language and tone. Staying respectful is a key feature of a good debater.

25stu286@lexingtonma.org

Junior at Lexington High School

9th grade: Novice Policy

10th grade: Varsity Policy

11th grade: Varsity PF

Please read my paradigm it's short and encourages quality debates

Do:

• Clear speeches (signposting, good organization)

• Reasonable speed: Please use depth over breadth (quality > quantity). That is what PF is for

• Tech > Truth

• Collapse on your best arguments

• Weigh arguments

• Tell me what to vote on

• Show respect for opponents and partner

• Cross ex is for you -if you want me to vote on it then bring it into your speeches

• Show up on time

• Run whatever arguments you want

• PLEASE USE EVIDENCE

Don’t:

• Attack the person (attack their argument please)

• Be pretentious if I tell you that you won (laughing, excessive celebrations)

• Cheat (e.x. steal prep, consult out of round help)

• Strawman arguments and lying about evidence or authors is unacceptable

Other thoughts:

• Can’t vote on it if I didn’t hear it

• Good speaks = you did the things above

• Bad speaks = you didn't do the things above

• I like framework but will not vote down if you don't use it

• time yourself- opponents should also time to ensure you arent stealing

FAQ:

• LD: never had any LD experience so tell me what I need to know before round
• Policy: hopefully I'll never have to judge policy but if I do send speech docs

I'm a senior at Brooklyn Technical High School and this is my sixth year doing debate. I'm a flow judge. I try to maintain some eye contact to indicate I'm listening but, generally, I will be flowing during round. My decisions usually boil down to extensions and warranting. I will vote on crazy impacts only if the warranting is good or responses are really bad.

I give pretty high speaks. As long as you don't say slurs or anything offensive, I will give you decent speaks. Just make sure you're clear and civil. I like clash in cross as long as it's respectful and appropriate but I don't flow cross and won't vote on it.

I heavily dislike evidence arguments, meaning "this evidence is bad" without a valid explanation or warranting. Please don't focus on evidence too much! Tech > Truth, so make sure you have good command over your evidence. Signpost! Everything!

You can keep time but I will keep final time.

Not super familiar with prog arguments, so do them at your own risk.

If you choose to set up an email chain, put me on it: nvegaayala19@gmail.com