What's good gang,

Before you cook up the debate, here are a few major points on how I will judge and monitor the round:

• Please keep track of your time, I will be keeping track of time also just in case, however if you go over 15 secs the limit, I'll have to cut you off
• Anything new brought up after first summary will not be evaluated for my final decision
• Off time road maps are chill
• I'm ok with some speed, but otherwise keep it relatively semi normal speed
• I will be listening and flowing to crossfire
• For weighing, make sure to do actual comparative weighing and analysis between you and your opponents case instead of just saying buzz words like "we win on probability"
• I will disclose the result (If the tournament allows me too) and provide feedback if there is time at the end of the round
• Most importantly, be respectful and kind toward others, and have fun!!

Happy Debating!

LD:

1. Speak at a normal rate of speed; no spreading/speed talking

2. Attack & rebuttal "down-the-line" - val, crit, conts, sub point tag lines

3. Be aggressive in CX, but not belligerent

4. rebutt. Specifically why your val Trump's your opp's val.

CX:

1. Speak at a NORMAL RATE OF SPEED. If I can't understand you, I can't give you credit for args, refs, or rebutt.

2. Keep the esoteric jargon/terms/abbreviations to a minimum. ("K's" "disads", etc)

2. Hit the H.I.T.S. (Harms, inherency, topicality, solvency, )

2. I'm looking for cogent, well-exposited arguments supported w/ pertinent/rez relevant documentation.

3. Don't spend too much time on topicality unless your opp's off-topic args are egregious.

4. Neg doesn't need a c/p unless it is vital

PFD

See above

I’m a sophomore at Newton South. Add me to the email chain (miad0008@gmail.com)

For the scrim:

run whatever

I’m tech > truth but if both teams agree I can go lay

please weigh and extend. PLEASE. I will not know what to vote off of if you don’t. More than that I don't want to do work. You should do it all for me and tell me where to vote

be funny in round or bring me food for boosted speaks! :)

have fun and lmk if u have any questions

general stuff (tl;dr) :

• I'm annie. I do debate. LHS '24//UChicago '28 (btw I know nothing about sports. this doesn't make me more likely to vote one way or another but if you're debating the student athlete topic just know I'm about as well-educated on that as your average hermit)

• My job is to adapt to you! This paradigm gives you a guide to my default style but if you have any preferences feel free to ask me to adapt to them. This is just here so I seem like a serious person :)

• Don’t be a jerk! I understand rounds can be heated, but there’s no need to get mad over the US sending things to alaska. Also, if your actions end in -ist, I’ll be the destructionist of your speaks

• No need to speed! The best rounds are tech rounds that are still at a conversational pace, now I can flow faster rounds but if you choose to go fast make sure you are clear (NOTE: Spread at your own risk. Stay 250 wpm or below, lest you want me to not flow something)

• Tech>truth: This means that I will be okay with voting on any arguments as long as they aren’t problematic or exclusionary, if the argument wins on the flow I will sign my ballot for it

• Ask Questions! There might be a bit of jargon in my paradigm that might not be easy to understand so if you aren’t sure how to do something, need clarification on certain parts of my paradigm, or want feedback after the round I’ll be more than happy to help!

• I like raccoons: and if you make a joke about one that would be nice, but no speaker points boost im afraid :(

Substance round:

• I evaluate rounds level by level: I start with the weighing - whose impacts are more important? Then, I ask who wins the best link into that argument? That’s where I’ll sign my ballot

• Please extend and collapse: Choose your best piece of offense (contention or turn) to go for in the backhalf, and when extending the case (giving a quick narrative summary of your argument) in summary or final, please please please actually extend the argument instead of just reading the card name ie “extend smith ‘22” is not a full extension, explain it from uniqueness to impact

• We could be weighin but you playin (in other words, please weigh!): I know this comes up a lot on paradigms, and it’s because weighing helps judges determine which impacts are more important. If both teams win links into different impacts, it’s up to weighing to determine which impact is to be prioritized

• Evidence Ethics/Calling for Evidence: I generally won’t call for evidence unless I think it’s important or if someone in the debate tells me to. I prefer evidence shared on docs because then teams won’t spend too much time sending evidence over the sub-par wifi, but it won’t affect my decision. Miscut evidence would hurt your speaks and, if miscut enough, might lose you a few arguments

• Defense is NOT sticky: sticky defense means that if a team reads defensive arguments or responses in rebuttal, second rebuttal or first summary doesn’t need to respond to it. This rule was made back when summary was only 2 minutes long but now that it’s been extended to 3 minutes there is no reason for defense to be sticky

• I presume First: If nobody wins any arguments at the end, I will presume (vote automatically) for the first speaking team. would prefer rounds not to end this way

THE REST OF THIS PARADIGM IS FOR PROGRESSIVE DEBATE! IF YOU ARE A NOVICE DON’T SWEAT IT BUT SINCE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF PROGRESSIVE DEBATE ARE SEEPING INTO NOVICE ROUNDS THIS WILL STILL BE HERE FOR REFERENCE!

Theory (if you must):

• I have no theory biases except trigger warnings are good and disclosure is good, I won’t hack for either of these but if you run theory otherwise you might want to keep that in mind

• If you make a trigger warning you should use a trigger warning form that is anonymous for respondents, I generally think that war/poverty impacts don't need trigger warnings (but you can argue otherwise and I will consider it like any other argument) but you do need trigger warnings for anything else that could be potentially triggering (feel free to ask me if you want me to clarify) eg trafficking, genocide, mental health issues, etc

• I default to competing interps and no RVIs unless told otherwise but I have no biases on this and which way I end up evaluating the round depends on what yall say

• Extend the full shell through every speech otherwise it’s considered dropped, I have very tiny threshold for “spirit of the shell” especially if it’s frivolous theory

Ks, Prefiat Framework, IVIs

• I will treat evidence challenge IVIs as round ending issues, but if I vote on an IVI I need it to be developed and warranted instead of a 3 second blip about why they should be voted down for doing X

• I am alright with prefiat frameworks but it’s better for them to be warranted in addition to the cards so the reasons why your framework means you should be voted up make sense even to debaters who aren’t familiar with prefiat arguments

• I am suspicious of “link ins are not allowed” arguments, not that I automatically vote against them but reading these arguments need a lot of good warranting for me to be open to it

• If Kritiks are read, they need to be slow and warranted, the same applies to T and perm do boths if you choose to read them in response

• If neither side wins or weighs between K and theory, I default to evaluating theory first but that changes depending on how you debate the round

• I’m not entirely comfortable voting on identity Ks against debaters of that identity, I won’t vote you down for this but it could potentially affect speaker points

Speaker Points Guide (I tend to be SUPER lenient about speaker points my coach yelled at me for giving too high speaker points so take that how you will)

29.5-30: debating was excellent, very well articulated, no big flaws in debating or strategy!

29-29.5:I thought your debating was good, maybe a few minor mistakes but nothing particularly bad

28-29: average, good debating overall but some mistakes, but not too bad (this is a pretty big range so the extent of a mistake or speaking style is going to impact where you fall on this scale)

27-28:made some pretty big strategic mistakes in this round

sub 27: There were a lot of large mistakes in this debate, or you were very unclear

I won't go below 26.5 but if you say something problematic. Then, I'm dropping your speaks to the lowest possible in the tournament .... just please don't UwU. We want to keep this a welcome space for everyone! If you feel unsafe please please please let me know ASAP - your safety is more important than a random high school debate round!

Most importantly, HAVE FUN!!!!!!!

Hi, please feel to ask me any questions about the points I make here.

General:

-Speaking fast is mostly fine, but if I can’t understand you, your opponents can’t understand you, and there is less for me to vote on

-Respect is extremely important and any disrespect towards anyone in the round will be noted

-Make sure to have all of your cards available as I may ask for one at the end of the round if I need clarification or if it was debated heavily

In the Round:

-Terminalized impacts are very important so make sure to describe how your impacts will affect me or the general public (numbers/statistics are great!)

-I don’t flow cross so if you or your opponent bring up any important points, make sure to address them in rebuttal or summary

-No new information can be brought up after summary, so if you introduce new points or respond to arguments for the first time in final focus, I won’t flow or vote off of them

-Weighing is extremely important as it is the only way for me to know why I should vote for you over your opponents. Make sure to weigh impacts as well as rebuttals

-Make sure all of your weighing and impacts are extended throughout the round. I can only vote on what has been extended though.

-Off time roadmaps can be helpful if you stick to them during your speech. Signposting is very important as it let's me know what you are addressing and where. The more specific you are with what you are responding to (contention, rebuttal, weighing type) the easier it is for me to flow.

Hi! I am currently a junior at Newton South and have done PF for three years. Add me to email chains (ellahurwitz@gmail.com). A couple things:

1. Please don't say "just a quick off time road map." Please.

2. In rebuttal, the second speaking team should frontline turns. Not required, but I like when teams collapse in second rebuttal.

3. I don't just care that your card says something—explain to me why it says that.

4. PLEASE WEIGH! Make my decision easy by telling me why your argument is more important.

5. I can't vote for you if in your second half speeches you aren't extending a warrant and an impact (and weighing and frontlining). Please please collapse.

6. I don't like theory and will probably evaluate it wrong. Would *strongly* advise against running it.

7. Make me laugh and I'll boost your speaks:) If you are mean to your opponents, expect your speaks to reflect that.

Good luck!!

Hi! I'm a sophomore at Lincoln-Sudbury and have debated during eighth and ninth grade, in the middle school and novice divisions respectively.

I highly recommend that before your speeches, you take a few seconds to signpost. This allows me to know what to expect and keep my notes better organized. Also for a similar reason, please don't speak way too fast. This will in the end only benefit you.

Something to keep note of is that I will not count anything said in crossfire unless you bring it up in a speech afterwards. I will not be taking any notes during crossfires.

Although I will be keeping timers, I expect you all to keep time for yourselves. I will give a ten-second grace period but anything after that will not be counted and you stand to lose speaker points (this part is only if you pass the ten seconds by a reasonable amount).

Remember, anything that is not carried to the end of the debate will not be counted towards my final decision.

Finally, all you have to do is put in your best effort and be respectful towards others. Have a great round!

Hi, my name is Austin Kelachukwu. I am a debater, public speaker, adjudicator and a seasoned coach.

Within a large time frame, i have gathered eclectic experience in different styles and formats of debating, which includes; British Parliamentary (BP), Asian Parliamentary (AP), Australs, Canadian National Debate Format (CNDF), World School Debate Championship(WSDC), Public Forum(PF), amongst others.

As a judge, I like when speakers understand the format of the particular tournament they’re debating, as it helps speakers choose their style of speech or debating. Speakers should choose to attack only arguments, and not the opponent. I do take equity serious, so I expect the same from speakers. When speakers understand the tournament’s format, it makes things like speaker roles, creating good and solid arguments easy, so they can act accordingly, and through that understand how the judge understands the room as well.

I suppose that speakers are to understand the types of arguments that should run in the different types of motion, their burden fulfillment and other techniques used in debate.

I take note of both key arguments, and the flow at which such argument is built, so speakers shouldn’t just have the idea, but should be able to build that idea also to create easy understanding of the argument. On understanding also, i prefer when speakers speak at a conventional rate, to aid easy understanding of what the speaker says.

I appreciate when speakers keep to their roles, i.e when a summary or whip speaker knows one’s job is not to bring new arguments but to rebut, build partner’s case, and explain why they won.

I value when speakers keep to time, as arguments made after stipulated time wouldn’t be acknowledged.

Austin Kelachukwu.

email: austinkelachukwu@gmail.com

Hi! My name is Anya, and I am a Newton South High School PF debater! My email is anyak726@gmail.com.

For Middle School Debate:

When speaking:

• Speak clearly!
• Be respectful to your opponents! Being rude during cross or any speeches is not ok and will result in low speaks.
• Use all of your time! I cannot stress this enough, I want to hear what you have to say! Even if you think you don't have anything more to say, just dive deeper as I promise you there is always something to say!
• I will time you, but also please time yourself. At the end of your time, I will hold up my fist. I will allow a 5-second grace period, but afterward will stop flowing.

Content:

• If it's not in summary, it's not in final focus.
• WEIGH(pretty please)
• Extend your arguments during each speech, and remind me again the basics of your argument.
• Collapse during summary! Choose an argument to focus on, and tell me why I need to prioritize it over your opponents.
• Final focus should write my ballot for me. Tell me why I am voting for you versus your opponents.

Progressive arguments:

• Run at your own risk. Not the biggest fan of it in general, I don't really think it belongs in PF.

You are going to do great :)

Hi there!

I was a Public Forum Debater at the high school level for two years at The Bronx High School of Science.

I'd just say please be nice to each other during cross and in-round-- I don't like watching it and we don't want your competitors to be discouraged.

I'll be taking some notes on the round and I will take those notes into account when making my final decisions, so please try to be clear and straightforward and carry your arguments through the round.

Do your very best to speak CLEARLY!!!! I don't care about speed as long as I can understand what you're saying and follow your arguments.

If you'd like, I can keep track of prep time and speech time as well.

Good Luck!

hi! i’m ariel and i am a sophomore with two years of debating experience at newton south

add me to the email chain or ask me any questions: ariellin8@gmail.com

first and foremost: attack the point, not the opponent. i will not tolerate any rude, offensive, or hateful behavior and will dock your speaks as a result.

♥ ♥ ♥

preferences (by no means do you have to abide by any of my preferences, just do what makes you comfortable)

- introduce yourself! please tell me your name and speaking position before your speech/the round starts

- signpost! tell me where you are on the flow to keep the round clear for everyone

- extending! 1. please collapse in order to clear up the round (if you don’t know what collapsing is don’t hesitate to ask) 2. i don’t flow card names so don’t just say “Baker 23” tell me the context of the card 3. defense must be extended through the round for it to be evaluated

- weighing! why am i voting for you? make my life easier and hand me the ballot on a silver platter

- cross! i don't flow cross and it won't affect my decision unless brought up in following speeches, but please be polite because cross will affect your speaks

- generally truth>tech

- no new evidence after first summary please

**i want to emphasize that I was a pretty traditional PF/LD debater and my experience with theory/other progressive arguments was very limited. i won't evaluate any progressive arguments (including disclosure theory). for LD, treat me like a lay judge**

1. I vote on the flow, with that being said if it is not said, I can't vote on it. However, if both teams are not doing the work, I'll have to do it alone, and you might not like my decision.
2. Respond to everything if you are going for an argument. If you don't respond to it, it's conceded.
3. Whenever you extend a case you need to extend the entire link chain, not just the argument. This includes extending authors, warrants, and impacts.
4. Don't speak fast.

Second year

tech>truth but don’t spread

I don’t flow cross but that doesn’t mean im not listening so be nice to eachother

weighing is rlly rlly important

if u don’t extend an argument through summary then im not flowing it. (Ex: you don’t extend your impact, then you no longer have an impact).

email: 3mmalyn4@gmail.com

Hello everyone!

My name is Paul (he/him) and I am a college freshman. Prior to college, I was a VPF debater at Bronx Science.
Email(for concerns, cards, etc.): petrovicicomriep@bxscience.edu

Some things to expect in a round:

- I am a flow judge but appreciate lay appeal because it usually means you are warranting more, so give me a narrative.

- Card names will not be included in my flow. You need to first explain the context of the card and then extend it.

- Cross will be listened to, but not again, not included in my flow. Anything you want me to flow will have to be said in the following speech.

- I can handle some speed in your speeches, but no spreading. You want all the evidence that you say to make my flow, so do everything you can to ensure that happens.

I want you to make it as clear as possible why I should vote for you. This means your warranting and especially your impacts should be fully extended and weighed.

I will not tolerate anything racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. Just don't do it. A bad round impacts everyone in the debate so let's try and have a good time. Debate is not only about winning, but having fun too. Don't shy from adding humor in your speeches, it makes the experience better for all of us.

Please do not hesitate to email me with any further questions.

FOR SCRIM:

I'll judge like a lay if it is agreed upon before round.

Anything frivolous is funny and funny things make me happy.

Don't run serious theory but frivolous theory is fine.

If you speak in a silly accent I will enjoy it but won't reward you with anything.

ACTUAL PARADIGM:

No sticky defense or anything

I vote off of the flow.

I'll believe anything that is said and conceded. If you tell the sky is orange I'll believe it. Don't make me have to do any judge intervention, everything should be thoroughly interacted with by both sides.

Repeating your response as a backline is bad, actually interact with your opponents response. If neither side does it it's a wash, if one side does they win the point, and if both do it then compare the responses through like analysis of evidence or warranting or historical precedent. If still nothing really gets done then that's also a wash.

Make sure to have good weighing, if you win your case and win the weighing you win the round. Weigh your turns.

Mitigation isn't terminal defense.

Im very harsh about extending case, internal links, and impact.

I don't evaluate new responses past first summary, and first summary new responses on their side is pushing it. Definitely no new evidence in first summary.

I don't care if you spread 50 bad responses, but 2 good responses is good. Don't spread past about 300 wpm or so.

Trying to sneak a new response past me, even if conceded, loses you a speaker point. I will catch you. Don't be abusive.

By default I don't care about probability, but if someone makes a good warrant I'll buy it if it isn't contested.

Theory and Ks I don't understand too well but I how to judge it.

Hi I'm Angela! I'm a junior at lexington highschool

Pronouns are (she/her)

I've been doing LD for 3 years on both the local and national circuit. I'm comfy with most arguments, tldr is to just make sure your clear and you write my ballot for me.

Yes I want to be on the email chain angelabowman07@gmail.com but speech drop is prob easier

Quick prefs:

• friv theory - 1
• generic theory/t - 1
• generic K's - 2
• policy - 4
• generic phil (kant, hobbes, etc..) - 3
• tricks - 3

Notes:

I will try my best evaluate almost every type of argument but there's no guarantee I can evaluate it well (i.e. if you read dense phil tricks I will try but no guarantee I will vote the right way unless you explain it really clearly)

For novices:

I'm comfortable with you reading anything no matter how weak the link chain is, I vote off of any argument as long as I flow a warrant

tech>truth

please make sure you weigh (under your framework and just impact clac) and write my ballot for me in your last speech

some notes:

• tech > truth
• my speaks start at a 28.5 and go up or down depending on the round
• I don't tolerate in-round violence (this includes, racism, sexism, homophobia, etc...) I'll drop you with low speaks
• don't be rude
• *I suck at flowing so if your opponent dropped something make sure to emphasize it
• I don't listen or flow cx

Hi y'all :) My name is Sofia Telio, and I am a second year PF varsity debater for Newton South High School. Yes, I want to be added to the evidence exchange chain (teliostal@gmail.com).

For scrim:

-Don't take it too seriously (ie have fun and run what you want).

- that's basically it, just don't be jerks

-if you can include a funny movie reference that I get + 0.5 speaks

-if you do cx in an accent (Southern, British, etc.) as long as it's understandable and both sides agree to it+0.5 speaks.

Non-scrim:

→I will flow the round, but I will not do the warranting for you.

→Tech > Truth

→Please track your own prep! I will time speeches and stop flowing after 10 seconds over the time limit.

→If you have questions, ask me! (You can also email me after round if you have a question about the decision).

→I will be more than happy to give feedback after round should you ask for it.

→I will disclose if allowed.

IN GENERAL:

• Don't be an awful person! Be respectful to everyone because otherwise the round isn't fun for anyone.
• Please, please, please weigh!! Ideally META weighing (comparing the weighing) but weighing of any kind is how you win the round in my eyes.
• No new evidence/responses after first summary. If a response is stated in rebuttal or case and not extended though each speech, and you come up in FF and say it was conceded, I will not believe you because I flow.
• I like collapsing in summary or second rebuttal, but that's up to you, and the round will not be decided off of it.
• Quality of speech > Number of responses
• Focus on actual content of the round. If they don't respond to something, definitely point it out, but that shouldn't be your whole speech.

ME PERSONALLY:

• Though I don't vote on it, I truly believe rounds can be won or lost during cross, so please use it wisely. (This will impact your speaks!)
• Please don't steal prep while asking for cards! It shouldn't take more than a minute to find a card.
• I'm not a huge fan of evidence indicts. I will listen to them, but the round won't be decided on them unless it's blatantly misconstrued.
• Please be coherent! I can flow quickly because I am a debater, but I do not have superpowers and if you are mumbling I won't be able to hear you.
• Writing out my ballot for me is always the best way to secure a W, so do voters.
• Please try not to go over 220 wpm or spread, but if you are spreading check with your opponents and send a speech doc.
• If possible, give an off time roadmap! EVEN IF YOU GIVE ONE SIGNPOST!!!!

CLASH:

• I LOVE clash!
• However, don't just read different evidence and don't interact at all. If one side tells me pasta is good and the other tells be pasta is bad, I don't know who to vote for. Tell me WHY, and that's where I'll vote.

SPEAKER POINTS:

• Speaker points largely come from your ability to balance narrative and technicality.
• Be eloquent and don't be a bad person, and your speaks will be fine.
• My average is 28.5.

PROG (if you don't know what this is, ignore it):

• I don't like theory, I think it's annoying. I much prefer actual substance in the round, that's what the topic was, that's what you should be debating. If there is an actual violation (minus disclosure theory) you can run it, but I'd still advise against it because I will probably notice and drop them. Basically what I'm saying is you can run theory, it's your round, but I am horrible at evaluating it and will most likely chose substance over it.
• -Ks are fine. I CAN flow them, I am no expert at flowing or evaluating them. Do with that as you will.
• -Other stuff that I'm missing... the fact that I cannot name it is probably a sign to you...

At the end of the day, it's just a debate round. It will not determine your future, I promise you'll be fine. Confidence is key! Best of luck to y'all!!! :)

Also, shout out to my partner Ellis ♥ Wouldn't be here without you bestie!!!!

Hello debaters, my expectations for this round are as follows.

Please try to make sure your arguments are clear and easy to understand, and that any important information is emphasized. Remember, if I can’t remember the point, I can’t judge you.

Following that, remember that arguments that you do not bring up consistently cannot be put in my final decision. Anything said during crossfire will also not count unless you bring it up in a speech.

Please also keep track of your time throughout the round- I will give reminders if you run past, and will give 10 seconds before speaker points may be lost.

Most importantly, be kind to your opponents. As a debater and judge, I value this the most out of all.

Looking forward to this round with you all, and remember to have fun!

Hello Debaters. The only paradigm I can have is just remember to quantify your impacts, this means provide numbers to impacts also remember to signpost so I know where in the flow you are. Its okay to speak fast, critical thinking is appreciated. Remember to weigh impacts.

Thank you

Hi everyone!

I'm Mia (she/her) and I am a third year PF debater at Bronx Science.
Email chains/Questions/Feedback: zaslowm@bxscience.edu

Some general things:

- I am tech > truth, however, be reasonable. I am a flow judge but appreciate lay appeal because it usually means you are warranting more, so give me a narrative.

- I do not flow card names, so if you want me to flow your evidence through the round you need to re-explain the content of the card. Just saying "extend Smith 21" doesn't cut it for me.

- I listen to cross but do not flow it, so anything you want me to evaluate should be brought up in the next speech.

- I'm fine with some speed, but just remember you want everything you say to make it on my flow.

- I don’t really like progressive arguments so run them in front of me at your own risk.

In terms of debate structure, I just want you to make it as clear as possible why I should vote for you. This means your warranting and impacts should be extended and weighed.

Finally, please be kind. Don't do anything racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. I know how awful a bad round can feel so let's have a good time. If you can make me laugh during the round I will boost your speaks.

Email me with any questions :)

Email: ezhang8599@gmail.com

pref guide:

Trad/LARP 1

K- 1/2

phil - 4

theory - 2/3

tricks - 5/strike

LD:

CX: I don't flow CX, but I am listening. If you want it considered in my decision bring it up in a speech. i default to binding cross.

Theory/T: I will always vote on RVIs. I default to reasonability, but this can literally be changed with a single sentence. I'd prefer if this was saved for reasonable abuse instead of used as cheap strategy to win the ballot I know what it's like to be blipped and your speaks will not like it if you try to blip through a shell 1ar and collapse entirely on it in 2ar. If you can clash, just clash.

Ks: I have a basic familiarity with most K lit, but I really like setcol and cap. It's really easy to see if you don't understand what you're running and I really hate seeing that.

CP/PICs/DAs: LARP is enjoyable in LD b/c it makes debate interesting. I default to PICs good and condo good. That can very easily be changed.

Phil: If you don't know what you're talking about, that might be a good time to strike. Otherwise, although I find it boring, I will listen and vote on it.

Impact Calc: please weigh well, if you want me making decisions on how to weigh for you, it'll not only be annoying but also unpredictable for you. The more you write for my ballot the better your speaks will be

Extend your arguments. This shouldn't be "extend [random card]" it should be "extend [card] b/c [warrant]"

TL;DR: Run anything you want, provided it's not racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.

tech>truth