Clements 22'

NYU 26'

Hi everyone my name is Aizaz! I competed in congres as well as foreign and domestic extempt for four years. I currently compete actively in college level parlimentary debate. I won't list my record in depth, but I did pretty well in high school so i consider myself experinced, especially in congress and extempt.

A few things to keep in mind:

if you want me on the chain: aizazbokhari549@gmail.com

any form of bigotry against your opponent or anyone else in and outside the round will result in an automatic L25 in PF, and for congress you will be ranked last.

PF:

Fairly simple, framing should be here, send the case with cards attached beforehand. I am pretty comfortable with speed, I will say clear up to twice if something is not clear, after that I will not flow in a way conducive to your team's sucsess. Anything not responded to is considered conceded and I appreaciate weighing throughout the round, but esepcially nuanced in summary. Your flow for final focus should mirror that of summary.

extra info: I am not super familiar with progressive argumentation in PF, though I will try to evaluate it as fairly as possible. Cross is binding if brought up in speech. Please show respect and kindness to everyone, especially newer novices. Nothing in debate requires you to be rude or demeaning.

Congres:

General:

I have extensive experince in congress. I am a flow judge, clear links, weighing, and proper general argumentation will always be more important to me than rhetoric. Having said that, rhetoric when done well and convincingly is an additon to your argument and will help you but it cannot make up for poor argumentation.

Questoning:

Please be respectul during questoning, heated back and forths will reflect poorly for both debaters. Good questoning results in info being acquired, it is not meant to make arguments.

First speeches and crystals:

For first speeches, my main critiera is if your argument frames the rest of the round and sets the contours of debate for the chamber than you have given a very good speech to me.

Crystals are high risk high reward. If you effectively wrap up the round, and cross-apply arguments where they can be applied and thus make clear for me my own ballot I will rank you highly. But if your crystal is just a stylised form of rehash then I struggle to see your additon to the round. So high risk high reward.

PO's

As long as the room is run smoothly with minimum errors(1-3) then you will be ranked fairly. A good PO is in the backround at best, so please keep semantics to a minimum. if you are experinced and no one else wants to or can PO, I appreciate you taking one for the chamber and that will reflect on the ballot.

Clash:

I very much value clash in round, and clash does not mean for me rehashing other peoples arguments. Clash, unless it is a crystal, should be new in the way it engages in the round. If your arguments are brought up or are the focus of clash that means you have engaged in the debate in a very convincing way and it will reflect well on my ballot. That said, while I like creative arguments if your points are so niche they disconnect from the round and I struggle to place you in the round it will not be to your advantage.

Small things:

I value quality over quantity, if I see you tried to speak but for some reasson could not and as such you got one or two less speeches than others I will not hold it against you. I value high quality speech to many speeches. Do not use someone's tragedy for bad rheotric, or make jokes that are not beffiting the seriousness of what is being discussed.

Fairness:

If you and some other group of people have rigged the docket/ actively try and keep someone from getting a speech you will be dropped. If you as the PO clearly rig the round, you wil be dropped. Their is no room on my ballot for this, any form of clear unfairness results in you being dropped.

Hi, I'm Justin. I wasn't a debater in school, but have grown to love high school debate in part because I: a) have a performing arts background, b) was raised by lawyers, c) at work, enjoy coaching members of my team on presenting and public speaking, and d) am inspired by what debate has meant to my high school aged daughter.

I am the parent of a current debater. I was not a debater myself in high school or college. I am a new judge, so it would be best if you did not talk faster than conversational speed. I will try very hard to make sure I am voting on the issues each side raises in the round, so please try to compare your arguments to the arguments made by your opponents. I believe the best debaters are respectful to each other. I look forward to hearing your arguments.

Priya Kukreja (she/they)

priyapkukreja@gmail.com

Hello! My paradigm was wiped (sigh) so here is a TLDR for NYC PF:

Background - I debated in Lincoln Douglas in Nebraska and on the National Circuit from 2014 to 2017. I have experiencing judging PF but I am not an expert with the format - please carry arguments through and articulate why I should vote for you clearly at the end of the round. I cannot do any work for you on the flow, so clash and impacting your arguments is key!

Westside LD:

I feel most comfortable judging critical and phil/framework debate. I'm happy to evaluate T/theory or policy arguments too, but you'll have to slow down, be clear about every part of the argument, and be explicit about the function it serves in the round. Please give me a way to weigh the impacts, e.g. value/criterion, standard, ROTB, etc.

Clash! Engage with your opponents argument. Impact your arguments to your fw/rotb. Take the last few seconds of your final speech to tell me why I should vote for you.

Speed - Stay around 6/10 and you should be just fine. Slow down on tags and author names. Please don't be rude.

Debate is a wonderful opportunity to learn and build community, please treat it as such!

Respect, integrity, confidence - Tirado