My paradigm is Communication. This means that if someone is speaking so quickly that I can't pick up what they're saying, then they lose points. As an academic I'm accustomed to jargon, but if that is overwhelming in a speech or debate then that meaning can be lost, so that loses points with me as well.

Flow. Logical connections between arguments.

Overall good structure, flow and smart use of the cross fires impresses me.

Extensions: All pieces of offense needs to be extended in summary and final focus. If it's not in summary, it shouldn't be in final focus. No new responses in second summary or final focuses.

Prog: Theory players substance and Ks. Default to competing interps. Run theory if you want I can understand it. Everything needs to be warranted on theory (explain why no RVIs, when opponents should respond etc).

Speed: Medium speed and you need to just be clear. Just don't be unclear especially during construction and building case.

Run any argument you want, how you want it, I'm not going to tell you how to debate.

nathan.gong@utexas.edu

Email chains should be sent out before round starts and 1AC should be read at start time. This is my strongest opinion about judging.

Hi everyone, I did LD in high school at Plano East and qualified for the TOC three times. Went twice, broke once, yada yada. I'm now a student at UT Austin!

I've been out of debate for a year and a half so I don't care what you read. I like intelligent people, so just be strategic/debate well and I will reward you with high speaker points. I loved reading body politics even though it's a troll argument.

I am a parent judge. I enjoy judging debate competitions and listen to well-thought out cases and arguments. Beyond your primary case, I pay special attention to how well you defend questions about your contentions, how well you pose questions to your opponents in Crossfire, and how clearly you speak in an organized way. Good luck and Happy Debating!

My name is Manish Kumar. I am a parent judge, have debated in my childhood days at school but have no experience in judging high school students so really looking forward to it.

I don’t consider myself savvy on technical details of the debate but will be judging on clear arguments, and being respectful to each other. Please explain your arguments clearly, and speak at a pace that I and other listeners can follow. I am Okay with any arguments as long as they are not offensive, racist, etc. I am fine with speed as long as everyone in the round can clearly hear the arguments.

I am data-driven and appreciate good analytics to back your argument. I will do my best to judge only what I am given in the round and will leave my badge at the door.

I will leave feedback on the ballot. Above all, remember to have fun and be respectful to your opponents!

Email: engineermanish@gmail.com.

Best of luck to all debaters!

I have some judging experience, however consider me a lay judge while making arguments.

I am here to evaluate the arguments presented by both teams and determine which team has done the better job of persuading me. I am not an expert in debate, so I will not be able to follow complex arguments or jargon. I am looking for debaters who are clear, concise, and persuasive. I will also be considering your delivery and demeanor when making my decision

some specific things I will be looking for:

• Clarity:Can you explain your arguments in a way that I can understand?
• Conciseness:Can you get to the point without using too many words?
• Persuasiveness:Do you use evidence and logic to support your arguments?
• Delivery:Do you speak clearly and confidently?
• Demeanor:Are you respectful of your opponent and the judge?

some things that I will not be swayed by:

• Speed:Speaking quickly does not make you more persuasive.
• Volume:Yelling does not make your arguments more valid.
• Jargon:Using complex debate jargon will only make it harder for me to understand your arguments.
• Personal attacks:Attacking your opponent personally is not a valid argument.

Alexandra Morales

Hello!

I am a former public forum, policy debater, and volunteer judge with standings as Novice to JV (Middle School to High School respectively). Below you will find a few pointers and requests:

1. The job of a debater is to communicate and support your argument through analyzed and critiqued material (articles, policies, journals, etc.) which is why I want to hear your interpretation and stance on the matter

1. DO NOT just read the evidence and material. I expect debaters to explain its relevance to the debate and your position over the opposing team.

2. Ensure that the material you utilize reverts to the arguments you consistently presented throughout the debate to answer the opponents' opposition and enhance your position

1. Extending and Flow is key here

3. I am objective when it comes to counter-plans, topicality, kritics, and theory arguments HOWEVER you must explain why it is significant to the debate topic

4. Do not worry about presenting all arguments for your position for the sake of content

1. An individual/team can have 10 more arguments than the opposing side and lose due to a lack of foundation

2. Having more evidence from different perspectives for an argument is just as significant or even more

5. Debate is exactly what it denotes, arguing or discussing a subject in a FORMAL manner

1. Argue ideas not each other!

6. When it comes to speech, I prefer clarity over tempo

1. It is acceptable to sacrifice speed to ensure that your message is being communicated effectively

1. There is enough time! No need to spread if you manage your time well

7. ALL debaters need to explain arguments and key terms as I may not be familiar with the topic of the debate

1. The use of examples and illustrative points adds emphasis to your argument and thereby helps me understand your position

2. Signposting and summaries are encouraged

Good luck and Have Fun :)

Hello. I debated in PF for 3 years from 2017-2020 for Westlake High School, Texas. I competed on the national circuit during my last year.

Tech > Truth. I think debate is a game.

If anything is confusing on here or if you have any questions, just ask me before round.

*For online rounds: Please do not prep without timing while the other team is looking for cards/having technical difficulties. Be fair and honest, time your prep.

1. Argumentation. I was mostly a substance debater so this is what I am most comfortable with. That being said, I do not care what you run as long as it is explained to me (although I would definitely prefer substance arguments). Again, I am tech > truth so you can say extinction good and I will buy if it is explained well. I have experience running extinction framing if that is something that interests you. I understand the basic functions of theory and K's, but I am not well-versed in the lit. You can run those progressive arguments if you like and I will evaluate as best as I can, but just keep in mind that I'll have some trouble if you are going fast and not explaining things well for these types of arguments. It's just hard for me to follow and conceptualize these more progressive arguments, but I don't want to stop you from reading progressive arguments if that is what interests you. If you do like reading wacky substance arguments, go for it, I'm all ears.

2. Speed. I enjoyed going fast while debating and I can handle some speed, but I never was the fastest flow-er so try not to go too fast. I should be fine with most PF speed. Going fast is your choice and I'll try my best to keep up, but there is always a chance that I miss the nuance or specific warranting when you're speaking fast.

3. Extensions/weigh. Please make sure you are extending all parts of your argument (links, warrants, impacts, and anything in between). If you extend your link but no impact, it will be very hard to evaluate. Also, extensions or any argument has to be in both summary and final focus for me to evaluate it. However, don't spend all your time extending, just extend and continue. If something is dropped and the other team extends it, I will consider it as conceded. Also, frontline your case in 2nd rebuttal, otherwise the defense will be conceded. Defense is not sticky. Don't bring up new arguments in summary and final focus and expect me to count it as extensions. Weighing is also VERY good and will win you rounds. I know weighing can sometimes be hard and messy, but try your best. Conceded weighing stands true.

4. Card Calling. I think calling for cards as a judge is interventionist, however, evidence ethics is also extremely important. I will only call for a card if I am explicitly told to in a speech. If there is a piece of evidence you want me to look at, tell me in a speech, and I will look at the place that you tell me to look at. I try not to intervene, but I want to be fair, so if something is not right, just tell me in a speech and explain why.

5. Presumption. I will try to make a decision to the best of my ability. If there is nothing I can possibly vote on and I have to presume, then I will presume neg because it is the least interventionist (the aff's burden is to disprove the neg). However, if you want me to presume any other way (1st or aff or whatever), just warrant why in a speech.

6. Disclosing. I will always disclose unless I am not supposed to. I will try and give oral feedback and I will write less on the ballot, so write down what I am saying if you don't want to forget. If you want to ask questions or anything, go for it, just try to be chill. I won't be mad or hold it against you, I think questions are good and will help everyone learn more.

7. Speaks. I would say that I generally give higher speaks, and I will give 30s to great speakers. Some tournaments are trying to standardize speaks, so I try my best to adjust to what the tournament speaks call for.

8. Other notes. Please, please signpost otherwise I might miss something trying to figure out where you are on the flow. Try to be nice during round to make it more fun, but I understand if things get heated and won't dock speaks unless you are being blatantly rude. Don't be sexist, homophobic, racist, or anything of the sort. I sometimes make motions such as nodding my head or giving a questioning look, but I try not to be distracting. Use this to your advantage to see if I'm vibing with what you are saying or not. I never vote on cross, but I may occasionally listen if I am interested. Time yourselves and your opponents so there is no confusion. I would prefer that you flip when I am present just so if there is any disagreement I can help resolve it. If both teams want to flip before, I don't really care. Also, I am not coaching or prepping topics, so I won't have the topic knowledge as other judges might have, so take that as you will (I will usually catch on pretty quick).

As a debate judge, I am committed to impartially evaluating the quality of arguments based on clarity, evidence, and logical coherence. I also expect that all speakers will communicate at a moderate pace, ensuring clarity in their delivery and avoiding the use of jargon that they cannot explain coherently.

I am a lay judge. I am a parent judge.

I have judged ~10s of LD, PF debates and few speech formats.

I do take detailed notes and I am able to follow fast pace of delivery but not sure if that is enough to qualify me as a "flow judge". I will request debates to slow down if I am not able to follow along.

I need some time after the debate to cross check my notes tabulate results and come up with a decision, so I would not be able to provide any comments at the end of the debate. I will make all efforts to provide detailed written feedback when I turn in my ballots.

I make a good fait assumption that debaters have made all efforts to verify the reliability/credibility/validity of the sources they are citing. If a debater feels otherwise about their opponents sources, I would like to hear evidence.

I appreciate civic, respectful discourse.

Do not use a lot of debate jargon, the lay judge that I am would not probably not understand most of it.

I am a parent judge. Please talk slowly and monitor your own time.

Send cases and rebuttal docs w cut cards

zhe_tang@hotmail.com

Evidence is important:

1) Explain why I should prefer your evidence over your opponent's.

2) Tell me why I should believe your author is saying. With that being said, I tend to believe data, statistics, and empirics over author's opinions.

3) I place greater weight on recent cards, but the logic behind the argument is equally important..

Suryatej (Sunny) Vakkalanka

I debated PF, Congress, and Extemp in high school.

Speak clearly and slowly enough so I can understand. You can ask me at the beginning of the round if you want to check if your speaking speed is too fast. Don't go higher than 800 words for 4 mins.

Please avoid complicated jargon and don't assume I know anything about the topic.

Have fun and be kind to each other. Good luck

Lay judge! Please be slow and clear. Your arguments should not be overly complicated in the round. Be respectful to your opponents.