Last changed on
Fri January 26, 2024 at 11:18 PM PDT
Hi, nice to meet you!
In short, I've been debating for a while so I will understand most jargon and stuff. Therefore, feel free to run most types of arguments, don't be mean or use harmful rhetoric in round, do do impact calculus, make sound and logical arguments, and tell me what to look for and vote for. Off time road-maps are a good idea.
I'm sure all you are amazing, but I study public health and am deathly afraid of germs, so please don't shake my hand!
If you would like more information about me or about how I process debate, continue reading here:
General/Important Things on How I Judge:
-Call all Points of Order(POOs)in the last speeches. I will protect the flow as much as I can but calling them is best.
-Content warnings are generally appreciated because we do not know the background of all the people in the room.
-I'm ok with counter-plans (CPs), theory, and kritiks (Ks) and whatever arguments you can make against them
-I am not an expert on theory or kritiks, but generally, I can keep up. Make sure that you are thoroughly explaining your theory and your kritiks regardless because debate is educational at its core.
-Speed is ok, but let everyone in the room know if you are going to spread. If your opponent is talking too quickly, please call CLEAR (this means to say clear in an assertive tone and is a signal for the other team to slow down). If you are talking too quickly and not enunciating to the point that I cannot understand, I will stop flowing.
-Tag-teaming is ok, but be respectful. If you are puppeting your partner to the point of it being obnoxious and rude, I will drop your speaker points.
-Point of Informations(POIs): I think that it is polite to take at least one if not two.
Background on Me:
-I debated through college. I was not super-competitive in high school, but I have won tournaments and medals in NPDA, IPDA, and speech during my gap year (taking classes at a local CC).
Case Debate:
-I will try to be as much of a blank slate as possible (tabula rasa). Meaning that I will not intervene with any of my knowledge to the best of my ability. That being said, if you are saying lots of untrue things it might affect your speaks.
-Please have a clean debate. The messier the round becomes the more I have to go through and pick over information which increases the likelihood of some judge intervention.
-A few isolated quips will not win you the round. Make the debate clean and make it tell a story.
-Again debate is about creating a narrative, so collapse down and create the most compelling narrative you can make.
-Make your arguments logical and make sure they work together (ie. Advantages or Disads that contradict each other really grind my gears and happen more often than you would think)
Theory:
-It should make sense and be specific to the round.
-Throwaway theory is fine as long as you are specifically connecting it to what is happening in the round. (ie. don't run vagueness just to run vagueness, show me where the opponent is vague)
-Make your standards clear and explain it well. (Note: If you get a POI, I would suggest taking it.)
Kritiks: I think they are important to debate and I will listen to them, but because I am less familiar with them than some judges you might have, make sure you both thoroughly understand and can thoroughly explain your K.
-Do not make assumptions about others and do not run anything you already know is offensive and/or hurtful.
-People and emotions are more valuable than a win...and being offensive/causing emotional-damage probably won't get you a win.
-Like theory, make it specific to the round...please don't run something just to run it and not link it to the res.
-Please repeat the alt and take POIs. Ks can be hard and it is exclusionary not to make sure that your opponent understands what you are saying.
-Don't spread your opponents out of the round. If you are not clear or organized, it will be reflected in speaks or (depending on the severity) the way I vote.
-I will flow through what you tell me to and will vote on my flow. This means that you should emphasize arguments or links that you think are key to your Kritik.
Speaker Points: Generally, these are subjective...but I base them on a mix of strategy and style.
25: Please be more considerate with your words. You were offensive during round and I will not tolerate that because debate is about learning and it becomes very hard to learn if someone is not putting thought into their words (ie. please stop being racist, sexist, homophobic, etc).
26-26.9: Below average. Most likely there were strategic errors in round. Arguments were probably missing sections and did not have a ton of structure.
27-27.9: Average. General structure is down, but most likely the arguments were not flushed out and were loosely constructed with hard to follow logic.
28-28.5: Above Average. All the parts of debate are there and the manipulation of the arguments is there but unpolished. The basics are done well.
28.5-28.9: Superior. Very clear and very well done debate. However, most likely some strategic errors were made.
29-29.9: Excellent. Wow, you can debate really well. Good strategy and good analysis.
30: You were godly.
This paradigm was done really late, so it will be edited as I judge more.
