tjhsst, he/him, add me to the email chain: abennepal@gmail.com

IM FLAY

my paradigm is will sjostrom's &‎ eli glickman's but im REALLY BAD at evaluating anything prog

defense is not sticky

framing > metaweighing > weighing > cleanest arg > presumption (i presume best drip), but cleanest arg w/ contested weighing will probably always win (stolen thx brian)

i follow rwang's framework for drip

I default to probability > everything else (and not really impact probability, more like strongest link)

plz send (organized) ev docs b4 case and rebuttal +1 speaks if u do

anything -ist or -phobic gets u 0 speaks, sing the first 4 lines of freestyle by lil baby for 30 (song has to be playing in the background)

i love flex prep!!

any questions? ask in round or messenger (Aben Bhattachan)

i debate pf for dalton in nyc

add me to the chain: spencersdebateemail@gmail.com

not great with speed, so pls send docs

come to round preflowed so we can start asap

general:

tech judge, all standard rules apply

tech > truth

defense is not sticky

default util; fine w frameworks

summary + ff should mirror

happy to vote on turns, but they have to be weighed

i have a high threshold for extensions - extend every part of your arg + the warranting

warranting is v important; i dont flow card names + extending "smith 22" doesnt mean anything

frontline all terminal defense and offense in 2nd rbtl; frontline what youre going for in the back half entirely

fine with flex prep, open cross, paraphrasing, etc

weighing:

weighing is the most important thing in the round

all weighing needs to be comparative; weighing should not be a 10 sec blip :(

highly encourage metaweighing + carded weighing too

generally - "creative weighing" (prereq/link in/short circuit) >> probability/mag/timeframe/etc

prog:

if there's a violation that endangers ppl in the round, i will vote down the team myself

prog is eh, im probably not ur best judge for it

all shells need to be read immediately after the violation

not great with Ks - if ur going to run one, go slow and warrant

will not vote on tko's, tricks, friv theory

speaks:

L20 if you are racist/sexist/homphobic/etc

start speaks at 28; based on strategy and speaking

speaks get dropped for miscut ev (+ the ev gets knocked off the flow)

happy to disclose speaks + will disclose / give oral rfd

https://docs.google.com/document/d/18ZNFqc86wlvZ6DUCT4GJQw-4dG35Gnku-XkjCb7A8AM/edit

My name is Paari and I go to Lovejoy Highschool 25'

I do Policy and have done PF, LD, and Congress

Tech > Truth

You can run any argument in front of me, but you'll have to explain it well

Feel free to ask any questions

I debate pf for Horace Mann

Email: emilysdebateemail@gmail.com (add me to the email chain)

Make the round clean and easy to evaluate. Be a decent person or i will stop the round, drop you and give you the worst possible speaks

How I evaluate: I'll look at weighing/framing first, then evaluate the best link into the weighing.

Preferences:

- Tech>truth

- Weighing must be comparative or i will NOT evaluate it

- Prereq > link in > probability > mag > scope > timeframe > SOL is my default order for evaluating weighing, metaweigh if you want me to prefer a specific mechanism over another

- Extensions SHOULD not be blippy. The UQ, link, and impact have to all be extended for me to evaluate the argument

- I grant no offense on turns if there is no weighing on the turn

- Collapse or your speaks are capped at a 28

- Signpost so i know where to flow

- 2nd rbtl should FL all offense and terminal defense

- I prefer not to evaluate prog. I'm fine with theory but don't run Ks, trix, etc...

- Speed is ok but i would prefer to flow a slower round

Speaks

- If u do not impress me u will not be getting good speaks

- Automatic 30 if you give me food or greater than $5 before the round starts

she/her

Include me in email chains: michisynn@gmail.com

Any racist / homophobic / sexist, etc etc argument will earn you a loss and the lowest speaks I can possibly give at the tournament. This should go without saying.

• I have a very high threshold for arguments with sketchy link chains / internal warranting, but will buy the argument if it is dropped by the opponents and extended well.
• Implicate your defense and weighing well. Use ballot directive language to tell me where to vote and why.
• Please weigh. I love evidenced weighing and prereqs.
• You can feel free to run theory / Ks in a round, but do not trust me to evaluate them correctly. I have the experience level of a lay judge when it comes to theory / Ks. Also, PF is (in my opinion) a bad space to run Ks due to the short speech times. There’s no way to fully evaluate the nuanced literature in a 45 min round.
• Run what you are comfortable with. Don't try too hard to adapt to my paradigm, I am comfortable with voting on any argument.

Overall, have fun and don't take debate too seriously! You're still going to be the same person with or without a bid, 30 speaks, or an undefeated prelim record.