Hi debaters!

Please speak clearly and if possible, not too fast. Also please explain your arguments in plain terms.

Good luck!

I am a parent judge who likes clear and concise arguments that help the flow of the round

Hello Everyone. First and foremost - Let me congratulate you on making a choice to be part of Speech and Debate. Speech and Debate are essential tools for citizenry of democratic society with free and independent institutions and a very important vehicles to arrive at best possible solutions.

I am Raghu Bondalapati and a proud parent of a High Schooler. I have been a speech and debate judge for about a year and half. What i would like to see from Debaters is a clear and concise arguments, respect to participants of other teams and sportsmanship.

I am a parent judge, with little experience (judging), but I have a good understanding of the issues and have watched a number of debate competitions. I expect teams to know the rules and to time themselves.

I will give more weight to Arguments and contentions that make most logical sense.

Go pterosaurs!

I am a lay parent judge. Please explain arguments thoroughly at a reasonable pace.

`

Speak clearly and confidently in your presentations and arguments. Overly fast speeches which attempt to present too many facts , arguments or positions are not helpful versus a more moderate deliberate pace. I am looking for a clear flow of your arguments and views on the subject material. Similarly for counter arguments or rebuttals, you should be able to point to specific statements in the opposing side's presentation and present a more compelling rebuttal based on either logic or an emotional appeal or position.

I am a parent judge. Please do not spread or use debate terms unless you plan on taking the time to explain those debate terms. I used to do policy debate in high school, do with that information as you please.

Please do not resort to personal attacks; attack the arguments, not each other. Demeaning/degrading behavior or comments will be reflected in the speaker points awarded.

I value evidence ethics. Please include me on your evidence threads: sharonkcho@yahoo.com

Hi, I am a parent judge, starting 2023-2024 year.
My decision will be primarily based on

• Clearly presented arguments
• Evidence supporting the arguments
• Clearly differentiating their position during clash
• Well addressed rebuttals
• Being courteous to others
• Keeping time

I’m a parent judge, and I’m very excited to hear your speeches. As always, please be respectful to your fellow competitors and be mindful of the rules and time. Thanks!

I am a lay judge but have extensive experience with argumentation. Most importantly, be kind to your competitors and do not go too fast.

I am new(er) parent judge. I am listening to your arguments while keeping an eye on the clock and will let you finish the sentence but like to keep the proceedings on time.

I am listening to understand the logic of your arguments and how you are building your case. I also like to see you use your chance to ask questions of your opponents.

I view debate as a competitive, communication event/game. You should communicate your argument(s) clearly whether fast, slow or at a medium pace (MEDIUM preferred by me). I am merely a witness to the game/event that the participants in the round create for me, the audience, and themselves. Presumption is in effect. You must win your affirmative case.

If you are not in the out rounds, I expect you to be mindful of prep time. The round is a timed event, not just your speech. There is no such thing as "tech time." The fact that you have the use of a laptop in the round makes it incumbent upon you to be more efficient with your time. Stealing prep time by claiming that a roadmap does not or should not count as prep time or speaking time is a delusion. If you're in out rounds and there is an audience, then and ONLY then are untimed roadmaps permissible for the sake of the audience trying to keep track of the debate. Otherwise, part of the challenge of debate is being a maniacal time manager. Good time management makes you a better, more competitive debater and communicator.

Do not tag team cross-x!! If you're not doing cross-x, you should be prepping for your next speech. If you tag team cross-ex, I will tell you stop and ding your speaker points.

Help me, help you!!

Keep the flow organized. In REBUTTALS- tell me what the voting issues are and why you're winning those voting issues. If you can mix in appropriate humor bonus speaker points from me.

I am a lawyer and a professional philosopher by training. I was a competitive CEDA debater on a nationally ranked team way back before most of you were born. I've judged approximately 100 rounds of high school and college debate over the last several decades. I am here because I love the activity. I want you to have fun, be civil, kind and good sports with one another. Hopefully you make great, lifelong friends, and memories from debate.

Thank you for taking the time to read my judging philosophy.

Best of luck,

Michael Giove

I am a well-experienced parent-judge and have judged LD, PF, and Policy.

-I encourage you to talk at a reasonable pace so that your arguments are clear

-Make sure to keep time of yourselves

-Don't bring up new arguments in final focus

-Be respectful of your opponents

Hi, I am a parent judge and I can follow presentations better when ideas and words come at a reasonable pace and there is less debate jargon.

For Speech Events:

I competed when I was in high school a very long time ago in original advocacy, original oratory, and the equivalent to program oral interpretation.

Please let me know asap if you are cross entered.

If you would like hand signals to countdown on how many minutes left, please let me know before you start.

For Public Forum, the following are very important:

I will flow your speeches and arguments and will look for consistency.

I'm looking for clarity of references for making your case. You need to state the publication source, author, and date clearly. Do not just state the author's last name and year. References from >5 years ago are not as relevant.

Address the opponents arguments clearly, and don't ignore them. I expect you to actually address your opponents' arguments and their logic flow.

Make your statements with logical arguments and address specifics. Avoid vocabulary of broad generalizations/categorizations, which do not go over well with me. (e.g. statements such as, "If this happens, then billions of people will die.") You need to make the logic and connections clear. Acknowledge where the problems are complex, and it is not so clear cut.

Make good use of your crossfire time and prep time. Do NOT go over in time, especially in pre-prepared opening sections. No excuse of going over time as the first speakers - you will be penalized for this. I'll provide ~5 sec grace period to finish your sentence. Anything said after the time limit will not be taken into consideration.

Do not speak too fast. I'm looking for evidence of thoroughly thinking through your arguments and case and that it makes logical sense.

Absolutely be respectful towards others. Keep a level head. No yelling or eye rolling or any other disrespectful behavior or body language.

At the beginning of the round, please introduce yourselves clearly, so I know who is who (name, school, order of speaking) and which side.

Avoid using acronyms, jargon, or special debate terms.

For Speech:

Pacing, speed, intonation, gestures, eye contact, walk, volume will all be taken into account and need to congruent with the actual content of your speech.

I am a "lay" judge and English is not my 1st language. Please speak clearly, do not speak too fast, explain thoroughly, and use simple
assumptions about my knowledge of the topic.

Parent judge. Please speak slowly and clearly.

Hi, everyone,

I am a lay parent judger and has limited experience in speech and debate. I will weigh my decision based on:

1. solid data and strong evidence to support your view.
2. good communication and respect your opponent team.
3. clear logic, no contradiction.

Prefer normal speaking speed. If you use speech/debate terms, explain once when you first use it.

Good luck and enjoy debate.

- I'm a parent judge, new to speech and debate judging.

- I take notes, but I don't flow.

- While it won't affect my decision, I prefer debaters not speaking too fast.

I'm a parent judge, and I have been judging PF, LD, and INTERP for more than 2 years.

I lived in United States since late 1990s, so you can consider me as a native English speaker.

I usually judge the debates based on 3 aspects, the content and logic, the presentation skill, and the techniques during the cross.

lay/student judge

I am excited to be judging PF event. Though i haven't judged many events in USA i participated in many while in school-ing in India.

I have been judging since 2018 in tournaments from the rookie to varsity levels. I have been a lawyer in the past and like to view both viewpoints with good supporting evidence. Support for your contentions have to hold solid ground.

I also love clarity over ambiguity. I do not prefer spreading/speaking fast.

I am a lay parent judge who has judged PF, LD, and various speech events in the past two years. Please do not spread or speak at very fast speeds, speak clearly and slowly so I can catch everything. I can't evaluate any advanced argumentation/theory/Ks, so please avoid it.

Be respectful and have fun!

Thanks for checking my paradigm if you happened to check.

Firstly and importantly disclosed, I am an immigrant (moving to US only after 30) and English is not my first language. Please consider it and set your tactic right for ESL (English as a Second Language) as a judge, if you're a debater.

Please listen carefully what opponent says and please construct your turn more relevant to what other says, rather than only speaking what you 've prepared or repeating what you've already told.

Please refrain from just insisting or repeating lots of evidences as to support your claim, as they won't mostly buy me, cause I can't verify them whether they are true or not while I am listening to your debate. Right ?

I hope you will use more common sense than sci-fi articles, researches, newspapers, which requires lots of pre-knowledge. I won't even remember what you said after the debate. Right ?

To me, the debate is not whose claim is right or wrong, but whose appeal is more compelling to vote for.

You will earn my vote by the way you speak, listen, or gestures, and how you invalidate others claim or support your points well ...etc
(balance of all) and your consideration to ESL as a judge.

As a novice parent judge, I would appreciate the debate teams speak with clarity and don't go too fast. I will focus on how the team advance the argument, discredit the opposition and manage the clash with confidence.

I am a parent judge with no experience in any event. Please speak slowly. Most of all have fun!

My vote belongs to the speaker who builds a bridge of logic and reasoning, leading me across it to their point of view. Show me the data, paint a vivid picture, and leave me convinced that your vision is the one worth pursuing.

I am lay judge. my vote goes to the speaker who can melt my defenses like butter on a hot pan. But if you're spitting out words like popcorn kernels in a microwave, I'll be reaching for the extinguisher, not the ballot :)

Before speaking, please send me your case evidence and rebuttal speech to reduce time needed for evidence exchange during the round: R40135@gmail.com

lay

This is my fifth time judging public forum. I have a daughter that participates in public forum so I am familiar with the debate process.

TLDR; I debated parli in high school for 3 years and have been coaching PF, LD, and Parli for the last 9 years since then with state and national champions. Refer to specifics below

New stuff: In all honesty, I do not like the state of PF debate in the last 2 years. Evidence ethics, spreading weak incomplete arguments, and people using K and theory wrong. It has driven me to become increasingly less willing to be Tabula Rasa. Education is the priority and in my experience the truer argument usually wins.

Follow the NSDA debate rules for properly formatting your evidence for PF and LD.

If paraphrasing is used in a debate, the debater will be held to the same standard of citation and accuracy as if the entire text of the evidence were read for the purpose of distinguishing between which parts of each piece of evidence are and are not read in a particular round. In all debate events, The written text must be marked to clearly indicate the portions read or paraphrased in the debate. If a student paraphrases from a book, study, or any other source, the specific lines or section from which the paraphrase is taken must be highlighted or otherwise formatted for identification in the round

IMPORTANT REMINDER FOR PF: Burden of proof is on the side which proposes a change. I presume the side of the status quo. The minimum threshold needed for me to evaluate an argument is

1) A terminalized and quantifiable impact
2) A measurable or direct cause and effect from the internal link
3) A topical external link
4) Uniqueness

If you do not have all of these things, you have an incomplete and unproven argument. Voting on incomplete or unproven arguments demands judge intervention. If you don't know what these things mean ask.

Philosophy of Debate:

Debate is an activity to show off the intelligence, hard work, and creativity of students with the ultimate goal of promoting education, sportsmanship, and personal advocacy. Each side in the round must demonstrate why they are the better debater, and thus, why they should receive my vote. This entails all aspects of debate including speaking ability, case rhetoric, in-and-out-of round decorum, and most importantly the overall argumentation of each speaker. Also, remember to have fun too.

I am practically a Tabula Rasa judge. “Tab” judges claim to begin the debate with no assumptions on what is proper to vote on. "Tab" judges expect teams to show why arguments should be voted on, instead of assuming a certain paradigm. Although I will default all theory to upholding education unless otherwise told

Judge preferences: When reading a constructive case or rebutting on the flow, debaters should signpost every argument and every response. You should have voter issues in your last speech. Make my job as a judge easier by telling me verbatim, why I should vote for you.

Depending on the burdens implied within the resolution, I will default neg if I have nothing to vote on. (presumption)

Kritiks. I believe a “K” is an important tool that debater’s should have within their power to use when it is deemed necessary. That being said, I would strongly suggest that you not throw a “K” in a round simply because you think it’s the best way to win the round. It should be used with meaning and genuinity to fight actually oppressive, misogynistic, dehumanizing, and explicitly exploitative arguments made by your opponents. When reading a "K" it will be more beneficial for you to slow down and explain its content rather than read faster to get more lines off. It's pretty crucial that I actually understand what I'm voting on if It's something you're telling me "I'm morally obligated to do." I am open to hearing K's but it has been a long time since I judged one so I would be too rusty.

Most Ks I vote on do a really good job of explaining how their solvency actually changes things outside of the debate space. At the point where you can’t or don't explain how voting on the K makes a tangible difference in the world, there really isn't a difference between pre and post fiat impacts. I implore you to take note of this when running or defending against a K.

Theory is fine. It should have a proper shell and is read intelligibly. Even if no shell is present I may still vote on it. Very rusty right now.

Speed Do not spread. Speed is generally fine. (PF less than 900 words for a 4 min speech) I am not great with spreading though. If your opponents say “slow down” you probably should. If I can’t understand you I will raise my hands and not attempt to flow.

I will only agree to 30 speaker point theory if it’s warranted with a reason for norms of abuse that is applicable to the debaters in the round. I will not extend it automatically to everyone just because you all agree to it.

Parli specifics:

I give almost no credence on whether or not your warrants or arguments are backed by “cited” evidence. Since this is parliamentary debate, I will most certainly will not be fact-checking in or after round. Do not argue that your opponents do not have evidence, or any argument in this nature because it would be impossible for them to prove anything in this debate.

Due to the nature of parli, to me the judge has an implicit role in the engagement of truth testing in the debate round. Because each side’s warrants are not backed by a hard cited piece of evidence, the realism or actual truth in those arguments must be not only weighed and investigated by the debaters but also the judge. The goal, however, is to reduce the amount of truth testing the judge must do on each side's arguments. The more terminalization, explanation, and warranting each side does, the less intervention the judge might need to do. For example if the negative says our argument is true because the moon is made of cheese and the affirmative says no it's made of space dust and it makes our argument right. I obviously will truth test this argument and not accept the warrant that the moon is made of cheese.

Tag teaming is ok but the person speaking must say the words themself if I am going to flow it. It also hurts speaker points.

Public Forum specifics:

I have no requirement for a 2-2 split. Take whatever rebuttal strategy you think will maximize your chance of winning. However note that offense generated from contentions in your case must be extended in second rebuttal or they are considered dropped. Same goes for first summary.

I will not accept any K in Public Forum. Theory may still be run. Critical impacts and meta weighing is fine. No pre-fiat impacts.

Your offense must be extended through each speech in the debate round for me to vote on it in your final focus. If you forget to extend offense in second rebuttal or in summary, then I will also not allow it in final focus. This means you must ALWAYS extend your own impact cards in second rebuttal and first summary if you want to go for them.

Having voter issues in final focus is one of the easiest ways you can win the round. Tell me verbatim why winning the arguments on the flow means you win the round. Relate it back to the standard.

Lincoln Douglass and Policy:

I am an experienced circuit parliamentary debate coach and am very tabula rasa so basically almost any argument you want to go for is fine. Please note the rest of my paradigm for specifics. If you are going to spread you must flash me everything going to be read.

Email is Markmabie20@gmail.com

General

- Speak as fast as you want, but try not to spread. The words should be clear

- Focus on understanding of the topic and the depth at which one understands a topic

- I can time the speeches but prefer you please time yourselves

- Add me to the email chain: vishwas.manral@gmail.com

- Be respectful - don't say anything racist, homophobic, sexist, ableist, etc.

• Flay/treat me more lay
• Send me your cases

Arguments/ Debate etc.

I don't like progressive debate at all (No Tshells, K's, CPs, tricks, etc.) I will probably end up dropping you if you run it. If you do end up going for it -- please explain to me clearly why it should be a voting issue at the end of the debate.

Squirrelly arguments are ok but you need to actually explain your link VERY clearly or you can't access your impact.

I love when people signpost; it helps me follow along with what you are saying in your speech.

Please make sure that you can your provide evidence to your opponents. If you fail to do so, the argument is dropped.

I prefer off-time roadmaps but keep them brief.

Dropped args should not be brought back into the flow, but point out when your opponents' arguments are dropped. You know the rest of the rules, so please follow them.

As far as framework goes, I am fine with anything as long as you are following your framework. Debating against framework- if the opposing team provides a better framework that works and proves why the other team's framework is irrelevant or etc. then I will consider that. If you run SV you need to tell me why I should prefer that over any default util FW.

You run the show, so show me why you should win this debate. Impact weighing is greatly valued.

I won't flow cross (unless they contradict themselves), but if something big happens, tell me in your speech.

I am fine with disclosing cases as long as both teams are ok with it. If not, then please do not be forceful. (No disclo/para theory)

Speaks usually from 28+

Good luck, be kind, happy debating!

I am a parent judge, but have judged PF tournaments in the past.

I would recommend not spreading

I will be flowing.

Please signpost as much as possible.

Good Luck!

Please deliver your arguments to me as you would to your younger sibling. This means speak slow and don't assume that I already know anything about what you're talking about. I am more interested in the quality of the arguments than in their quantity.

Please also listen carefully to your opponent and respond to their arguments or explain how their arguments are irrelevant. Merely repeating your position in response their arguments is not persuasive. I tend to be persuaded by the side that has done the best job of clearly identifying the disagreements between the two sides. Whoever can do that often has the stronger contentions anyway.

I am a parent judge. Please explain arguments thoroughly and clearly at a reasonable pace.

New parent judge - Speaking clearly would be appreciated.

I am a parent judge and I have been judging events for the last 2-3 years.

For congress debate tournaments:

I look for clarity, speaking to the point, using floor space, eye contact, respect to other members. If you spread, talk too fast, run through impact parts too fast, I won't be able to keep track and will ignore them.

I try to focus and listen the entire duration of your speech. I write my feedback simultaneously as I listen to the speech. I also listen carefully to cross examinations, and will take account of every time you make a good point or defend effectively. Use your cross examination time effectively, I won't reward when there is a stalemate.

My decision is based on: framework, arguments, reasoning, evidence... Focus on why your impacts are important why they are better than your opponent. It would be good if you start out with specifics and then at the end you summarize.

Please do not say anything inappropriate, racist, homophobic, or anything offensive to your opponent. Please be kind & respectful to your opponent, and do not interrupt your opponent during cross-examination. No offensive terms or personal attacks

I consider evidence, and argument interaction very important. Evidence must be quantitive with clear and credible references. Supporting evidence is critical. I also pay attention whether opponents questions and contentions are addressed or not.

Please speak clearly. Also please define any acronyms you will be using throughout at the beginning. Make sure your key points and values are clear.

Hi! I am a parent judge and a former attorney. Please be kind and courteous to your competitors and do not go too fast.

I place a lot emphasis on eye contact and facial expression. Use your hand motions to express your self! Please talk to your audience, not to the computer screen or to your notes. Please don’t hold a computer in your hands- Instead, keep your hands free so that you can use them to express yourself. Please don’t keep looking at your computer screen and read straight off the screen with a monotone voice. You should know your facts well enough that you can make eye contact and only look once in a while at your notes. Please be courteous and kind to your opponent, and show good manners. Be honest in your facts and your sources. Present a well organized and convincing argument. Most of all, enjoy the debate !!!! I look forward to judging! Good work!!!

I'm a new judge, please go slowly. My student is in PF so I might have some knowledge about that event, otherwise assume I know nothing.

I am a parent judge. I look for the data and and evidence supported arguments during the debates. 

I am a parent judge. 

I appreciate slower/ clearer speaking with structured arguments. Repeat your main arguments in final focus.  

I am a parent judge with plenty of experience judging different debate events. Please try your best not to spread. The winner in my eyes is the one that does the better debating.

I am a parent PF judge.

I will try to flow. Don't speak too fast and speak clearly if you want me to follow your contentions. Don't be rude.

My preference is that the speakers should have a moderate pace in their speeches so that the judge could fully understand them and specifically when they are speaking about their contentions.

Be polite and respectful through the debate.

I request that both the parties could time each other while speaking and warn/alert if they are exceeding the given time limit

Be Clear + Concise + Kind + Logical. Have Fun.

He/Him

Hello! Good luck to all competitors. I'm a brand new judge, and I'm open to anything as long as you're not homophobic, racist, ableist, sexist, or any other -ism.

Please add me onto the email chain davidstrunz96@gmail.com

Debate: Truth>tech. Please avoid technical jargon or I will dock your speaks. Speak clearly and slowly, and I vote for the team that develops their argument the best. In the rebuttals, I expect to hear reasons why you won today's debate at the top of each speech. Make sure you signpost and have a clear overview. I am also an engineer if that helps.

Speech: Please speak clearly. I'm not familiar with the different types of speech events, and some humor is appreciated. If I can't understand any part of the speech or if you drop any words, I'll rank you lower.

I do not have any experience participating in debate tournaments or coaching the students. I have been judging the tournaments for the past one year as a parent volunteer. I have a masters degree, work for a technology company and living in USA for past 20 years. I regularly track various topics such as politics, business, international relations etc., so I have high level idea about the vast majority of debate topics. I have gone through judge training videos, so I have decent understanding on the judging criteria. I try to keep track of the 'flow' of the debate to understand arguments in perspective. I also pay attention to the rules like not bringing in new arguments in the closing/final speeches. Clear, audible, well modulated arguments help me understand and judge better, than trying to pack too much information in the given time. I would encourage the debate arguments to be done in a respectful and polite manner. I pay attention to the level of preparation, depth of the arguments and methodical way presentation. I judge solely based on the material presented in the debate and do not bring in any bias from my personal side. I look at team contribution as a whole than individual performances.

lay parent judge, will take notes

Do your best!!!

I like to see structure - lay a roadmap and get into the speech.

Stay civil, polite and courteous throughout the round, despite how the round is going for your opponent.

I do not like rudeness or snide remarks, we are all trying to learn together.

I am a parent judge, so please talk at a moderate speed. I flow somewhat and I value your speaking styles. I would like you be kind and nice to opponents.

I've judged PF before, but never any other event, so explain what the speeches are before you do them.

Please time yourselves and each other.

flay, do what you will.

Zita Wang

I am a parent judge. I judged speech and debate in different tournments in the past three years.

Take your pace, provide framework, and love to hear your summary about why you should win.

Be confident, run your flow, respect your competitors, and have fun!

I'm an intermediate-level parent judge with several years of experience judging mostly PF.

I believe the primary goal of debate (and speech) is to communicate effectively and persuasively. Make compelling arguments supported by solid evidence and reasoning and use examples to illustrate your points whenever possible. Aside from constructing your own case, make sure you adapt to your opponents' arguments and avoid talking past each other. Remember that it's not a sign of weakness to acknowledge an opposing viewpoint.

I understand some of you prefer rapid-fire delivery but please prioritize clarity and enunciation over speed and density. This way, I won't miss any of the key points you are making. Keep in mind that I cannot give you credit for things you said but I never heard.

Please do not introduce new arguments in the final speeches of the debate. I will not consider them.

Most importantly: always be respectful to each other, relax and have fun!

In my judging round, I would like to hear:

1. clearly emphasized opinions, which would be repeated in the middle and at the end of the speech.

2. convincing facts or reasoning to support the opinions/attitudes.

3. in debate, pointing out why opponent's arguments are not right/sufficient

4. polite and attractive language, better with some humor

Hello, since I am a parent judge please speak at a clear and reasonable pace in oder to make it easy for me to follow along.

Thank you.

I am a lay parent judge but not entirely new as I have judged at a couple of tournaments thus far. I am looking for clarity of thought. Be precise with your arguments and rebuttals, and be respectful to your opponents. I would prefer that you talk slowly, but you may speak fast if needed. Good Luck!!