***For all of the lifetime of this page, this page will be a work in progress (W.I.P)***

**Up to date for UT TFA/TOC (12/06-12/08/2024) still subject to change through the event**

Hiii Everyone!!!

--email: measama380@gmail.com--

Some background about me:

I am Hebron Alumni, currently 21 years old, and a Graduate at UNT, studying computer science. Some things I like are video games, watching k-dramas, listening to k-pop, and most of all spending time with friends. I have officially debated in NCX, NPF, and VPF. But I have learned and practiced all forms of speech and debate. I never got a chance to go to state or TOC, due to unfortunate circumstances. I have always enjoyed debating, because of the freedom it gave me, to talk about the real world, without any censorship from adults. With that being said, I appreciate those who truly give their best to their event.

If you can tell me who my bias is, then I will give you the win ;)*its a joke, but I will up ur speaks If u get it right

Context to Debate:

Debate is not mathematics. The round does not exist as a confined 3-dimensional space with certain laws of conservation. Debate is a form of conversation where members of the discussion are presenting their point of view and trying to persuade the listener to agree or join their side. With that being said, I expect that everyone in the round understands, that I am also a human being like everyone, and am prone to making a mistake. I will try my 110% to be objective in the round, so don't dismiss what I have said. You might not like it, and think I am wrong, but understand that all decisions made are still subjective to what made sense in my brain. I have been in your shoes, so please be patient and understanding with me, and we will have a great time.

*****Disregard of the rules of ethics and mannerism in a round is an immediate loss, I Do Not Care!*****

IE:

I base all my decisions on the criteria presented by NSDA, which differ between each event, if there is anything of concern that happens during the round please let me know immediately so we can fix it.

Congress:

I base all my decisions on the criteria presented by NSDA. I uphold congress to the same integrity as CX, LD, and PF. If there is anything of concern that happens during the round please let me know immediately so we can fix it.

CX, LD, PF:

(*For Online Tournaments*)

Pre-round expectations:

I expect everyone to have read the paradigm before entering the call. The only question that should be asked is those pertaining to statements that are not clear or have not been discussed on the page.

-->see the rest of the paradigms under the in-person section<--

(*For in-person tournaments*)

Pre-round expectations:

I expect everyone to have read the paradigm before entering the room. The only question that should be asked is those pertaining to statements that are not clear or have not been discussed on the page.

During the round:

All of Crossfire will not be noted down on the flow, I will probably listen to the crossfire to make sure that it is still civil, and noted down any points that might affect speaker points. A reminder: Crossfire is for you to ask questions and clarify anything in the round with opponents. Anything that is brought up and you want me to vote off it, you must bring it up in your following speech.

Progressive Arguments (aka disad, theory, k):

I am fine with any progressive argument except Disclosure Theory. PF is not CX, there is no reason to run such an argument. If you still feel like running it, I will not even consider it part of the round when voting, if I didn't buy the reasoning or analysis. Further, if you run a progressive argument without changing it to be at the VPF level, and I don't understand, I simply won't vote off of it

Overview and Under view:

I encourage having it, so I can have some parameters to vote off of, but I will not take it under consideration if it has not been carried throughout the entire round, in each speech (except rebuttal, ask before the round for more details).

Contention:

I expect that the contention is readable in 4 minutes without having to spread. So here is your fair warning, DO NOT SPREAD, if I can't follow you at your speed, I will either stop flowing or only write what I hear. This will probably hurt you. So be careful. IF you want to read really fast, send me the speech doc before the round, and make sure that it is the one you are reading. If you fail to do so, I cannot be held responsible for what I missed. I want clear signposting when you transition from Uniqueness, Link, Internal Link, and Impact.

Rebuttal:

For the first speaking team, I expect to hear a full frontal attack on the opponent's case. You can preemptively defend your case, but I will On the other hand, I expect the second-speaking team to attack and defend their case in the 4 min. Be sure to warrant analysis. I love to hear about turns on links and impacts, which creates ground for the clash needed in a debate round.

Summary:

NO NEW EVIDENCE FROM THE SECOND-SPEAKING TEAM! I expect to hear a summary of the round, with collapsing. Be sure to have Impact calculus or weighing.

Final Focus:

Give me voters. Why should I vote for you? NO NEW EVIDENCE!

Speaker Points:

I am not progressive in speaking. Don't spread, speak with emphasis on tags, speak clearly and loudly, and if you can make me laugh, you get higher speaks.

After the Round:

I plan to disclose if I can come up with RFD within 5 minutes. If the round is muddled then, It will take more time, be patient.

The Use of Evidence:

I will ask you to show me evidence if I find it unclear, couldn't hear, or suspicious. I might ask you to pull up the original article, so be ready to find it; the only excuse I will take if the wifi is poor or lacking. I will try to search it up on my computer too, but if I can't find it either, we have problems.

I'm a typical "some random guy's parent", that already tells a lot. So please address your argument clearly and speak slowly, please DO NOT spread. I will weigh style and arguments equally, and weigh analytics over evidence. Good luck guys!

Hi! I'm a lay parent judge with no debate experience. Please speak slowly and clearly! If you want something said in cross to matter, bring it up during your speech.Add me to the email chain, drritubansal@gmail.com

I am a parent judge, and have been judging debate (PF and occasionally LD) for about three years.

For debate, most important is that you are able to convince me of your arguments. Use evidence / cards and make sure to tie in those cards to your arguments. Manage your time carefully when you get into detailed explanations / rebuttal. Speed is fine as a long as I am able to understand what you are trying to convey. Be respectful to others. Although this is a tournament, make it a fun. educational experience. Humor is always appreciated !

Here are some guidelines, but I am not going to penalize you if you don't follow these, as long as your arguments are clear and convincing.

1. If you are a novice, you may want to spend, maybe, half a minute in your rebuttal, building on some of your arguments from the constructive speech. Even though its a rebuttal, there may be times when you feel that the constructive did not do justice to one or more argument.

2. If you bring up something interesting during crossfire which you think will help your case, try to bring it up in your next speech, to give it more emphasis.

3. Compare using weighing, impact, etc.. That's a good way to summarize your case.

Again, these are suggestions only. You have practiced hard and long, and don't change your flow to adhere to these.

Adding me to our email chain is not mandatory. You can add me if you like, but I am judging by what I hear from you.
abhijeetc23@gmail.com

Good luck !

Hi, I am a parent judge. I have been a judge in speech competitions but I am new to the debate scene. I will give my best.

Have fun!

I mainly judge PF events. I am an avid history and current affairs buff. I also do research on resolutions that are being debated so I can follow positive and negative arguments.

As a judge I will be evaluating debaters for their overall persuasiveness, which in my view has 2 elements:

1. Logic of argument: The argument must be coherent and it must be in the context of the resolution. It is important not to drift away from the resolution. Drift happens when a debater discusses implications of the resolution and then implications of implications and so on. Use the resolution as a guide and tie your arguments back to the resolution at hand. And, successively build your position, while undermining your opponents arguments.

2. Presentation style: This includes clarity of speech and body language. Debaters have limited time so they must speak at a good clip but it cannot come at the cost of clarity in speech. Vigorous but respectful disagreement with opposing team is expected. Before, starting your speaking time give a one sentence overview of how you will proceed. For example, "First I will refute my opponents positive or negative points, then I will explain and provide evidence of the points I made in my opening remarks", etc. Finally, a word of caution about "spreading", it does not work. If your goal is to read out loud as many words as you can in your allocated time, you will almost certainly loose points.

The golden rule is not to loose your audience. As a judge, I am the audience and debaters will have my undivided attention. But if a debater loses me, they will lose points.

I am a parent judge and have been judging the debate tournaments for last 5 years.

When I am judging the debate, I am looking for teams that are able to

- Focus on the topic at hand

- Support their topic with credible evidence

- Are respectful to the views of the other teams, while clearly calling out why they feel that the opposing team views are not comprehensive and why their own case is better.

- Are clear in articulation and are not rushed

As a new parent judge, I am dedicated to being fair and impartial. I don't have any preconceived biases or knowledge about the topic being debated, so I will rely solely on what is said during the round to make my decision.

I would prefer debaters speak clearly and in normal pace (not familiar with spreading :-) I will base my decision on who I believe made the most convincing case, explained their arguments clearly, and provided the best weighing and impact analysis. Wish you all good luck and enjoy the debate!

Hello,

My name is Atul Kapoor. Please add me to the email chain at kapoor.atul@gmail.com.

I’m a lay judge with a good chunk of judging experience. To win my ballot: explain your arguments clearly and focus on quality over quantity. Speak at a pace that doesn’t make me feel like I need subtitles—no spreading, and keep the debate jargon to a minimum, please.

I judge only based on what’s said in the round, so do the work for me—don’t make me intervene. Crossfire isn’t going to sway me, so don’t bother trying. Use it to clarify your opponent’s case and hit back in your speeches. For me, crossfire is like background music: I’m barely tuned in.

Got a flashy extinction argument? Cool, but make it believable. If you’re claiming healthcare reform is the first domino to nuclear war, I’ll need more than just creative storytelling. If your opponents stretch logic like taffy, call them out—it shouldn’t just be me noticing.

Speaker points? Earn them with clarity, good pacing, articulation, and some eye contact. Bonus points for not sounding like a robot.

When possible, I’ll disclose my decision and leave feedback on the ballot. Above all, be respectful, have fun, and make this a great debate.

Good luck!

Hello, I am a parent judge, and I value clear and logical argumentation. Here are a few things to keep in mind:

1. Quality over Quantity: I would rather see fewer, well-developed arguments than a large number of under explained points.
2. Clarity over Speed: If I don't understand what you are saying, I won't be able to evaluate it.
3. Politeness and Respect: I will not tolerate any misbehavior in round.
4. No Kritiks or Theory

I will probably go for probability of impact over magnitude of impact. Properly warranting your arguments will make me inclined to vote for you.

Also, make sure to set up a email chain before the round: dfg2hm1118@gmail.com

Make sure to enjoy the competition!

I have been a public speaker during my school, college and work years. Its something I have always enjoyed doing.

Growing up, I did not participate in PF but have been judging PF events for 2 years now. Things which appeal to me - clarity of thought / argument, research and data backup in framing arguments, voice projection and intonation, and ability to ask sharp and direct questions.

Treat me like a lay judge.

Please do not be too fast in speaking, please be respectful to your opponents at all times, and please stick to schedule.

I hope to enjoy this tourament with you guys and wish you all the best!

Treat me like a lay judge, so please don't spread-if I'm a bit slow, please bear with me

I'd prefer if you didn't run theory shells or Ks, but if you choose to do so, please explain in depth.

Racism, sexism, homophobia, or rudeness/bigotry of any kind will result in 0 speaks and an auto loss

Tech > truth, but keep your arguments sensible

I encourage you to share your case document (PDF format) with me at r_prasanna@yahoo.com

Speak Loud and clear.. Have fun debating!

I am a parent judge, who has judged a reasonable number of rounds. You may speak fast, as long as you are understandable. Cite your sources as much as possible. If you call for evidence outside of cross-ex, you will be using your prep time. Also, please avoid asking super long questions during cross-ex, and allow the other team to answer. I give speaker points based on strategy and presentation. I may dock your speaks if you take forever to pull up a piece of evidence. To avoid this, please start an email chain and add me at subashri.r@gmail.com.

Debate is about having fun, enjoy it!!

Hi! I am a lay judge with IE experience, but I'm very new to debate. Please be respectful, keep it simple and don't go too fast.

Add me to the email chain: thedojie@gmail.com

Hello
My name is Isswarya Srinivasan. I am a parent judge and new to judging.

Debate is an activity about persuasion and communication. Please ensure you articulate a clear and fully developed argument in a conversational pace.
Assume I do not know anything on given topic. Do not overload your speech with debate jargon.

I will do my best to provide feedback as allowed.
Have Fun! Best of Luck!

Thanks
Issy Srinivasan

Note: Send debate cards or any relevant documentation to my gmail

isswarya@gmail.com

I did not do debate in high school or college.

I have coached speech and debate for 20 years. I focus on speech events, PF, and WSD. I rarely judge LD (some years I have gone the entire year without judging LD), so if I am your judge in LD, please go slowly. I will attempt to evaluate every argument you provide in the round, but your ability to clearly explain the argument dictates whether or not it will actually impact my decision/be the argument that I vote off of in the round. When it comes to theory or other progressive arguments (basically arguments that may not directly link to the resolution) please do not assume that I understand completely how these arguments function in the round. You will need to explain to me why and how you are winning and why these arguments are important. When it comes to explanation, do not take anything for granted. Additionally, if you are speaking too quickly, I will simply put my pen down and say "clear."

In terms of PF, although I am not a fan of labels for judges ("tech," "lay," "flay") I would probably best be described as traditional. I really like it when debaters discuss the resolution and issues related to the resolution, rather than getting "lost in the sauce." What I mean by "lost in the sauce" is that sometimes debaters take on very complex ideas/arguments in PF and the time limits for that event make it very difficult for debaters to fully explain these complex ideas.

Argument selection is a skill. Based on the time restrictions in PF debate, you should focus on the most important arguments in the summary and final focus speeches. I believe that PF rounds function like a funnel. You should only be discussing a few arguments at the end of the round. If you are discussing a lot of arguments, you are probably speaking really quickly, and you are also probably sacrificing thoroughness of explanation. Go slowly and explain completely, please.

In cross, please be nice. Don't talk over one another. I will dock your speaks if you are rude or condescending. Also, every competitor needs to participate in grand cross. I will dock your speaks if one of the speakers does not participate.

For Worlds, I prefer a very organized approach and I believe that teams should be working together and that the speeches should compliment one another. When each student gives a completely unique speech that doesn’t acknowledge previous arguments, I often get confused as to what is most important in the round. I believe that argument selection is very important and that teams should be strategizing to determine which arguments are most important. Please keep your POIs clear and concise.

If you have any questions, please let me know after I provide my RFD. I am here to help you learn.

Pronouns: he/him

Hi! I am a parent judge. Please explain your arguments clearly, and speak at a pace that I can follow. One articulated argument is better than five poorly construed arguments. I will try to jot down the main points of the debate the best I can, but please emphasize your most important arguments in your last speech. I weigh both logical arguments and the evidence in support of your arguments. I emphasize the quality rather than the quantity of the evidence. I will do my best to judge only from what I am given in the round, so please do the work for me and don't make me have to intervene. Good luck!