CBSR Open IE LD 2
2018 — Redlands East Valley, CA/US
Eva Chang Paradigm
Soo Yeon Cho Paradigm
Sajeed Chowdhury Paradigm
Maggie Constantino Paradigm
Dany Doueiri Paradigm
ROSALIE FRANCHE PORAYOUW Paradigm
Dean Gerstein Paradigm
Flowy debate judge. Values concise and orderly substantive clash (on warrants, links, and impacts), good time management, consistent strategy, effective use of cross ex, and signposting. Mostly tabula rasa but dings for gross fantasy and adds points for good argumentative use of accurate knowledge of real world. No speaks given for extensive use of debate jargon. Spreading fine as long as the diction is crystalline.
Carrie Guo Paradigm
Erika Gutierrez Paradigm
Angelica Gutierrez Paradigm
Sophia Hartsch Paradigm
Elaina Houchens Paradigm
Meena Kaul Paradigm
Hilda Kyle Paradigm
BK Lee Paradigm
Suzanne Miller Paradigm
Stephanie Muravchik Paradigm
Kevin Ngo Paradigm
Thomas Nguyen Paradigm
I am a lay judge. I judged both speech and debate for a couple of years. Make sure to present your cases clearly and at a normal speaking rate. If I don’t understand your logic and evidence links then I can’t vote for you. Have a great debate.
Dean Nishimura Paradigm
Yvonne Noronha Paradigm
Shannon O' Connor Paradigm
Richard Opp Paradigm
I'm an experienced parent judge with three years of experience judging Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum, and Parli. I will be flowing your round.
When it comes to speed, I want a debater to be clear, concise, articulate, and speaking at a reasonable, understandable pace. I despise, with a passion, spreading and the arguments that often accompany that "rhetorical" style.
Arguments: Please be rational. Links to extinction devalue reasonable debate, if you use them, you lose. This same rule accompanies K-debates, theory debates, irrelevant phil debates, and most things "circuit debate."
If you're racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. you might as well not come to round.
All of this is to tell you what not to do because the pendulum of debate seems to be swinging towards this and away from critical thinking, rational thought, and deep and poignant philosophy. This next bit is what I actually enjoy to see in a debate.
Framework: I weigh philosophy heavily, especially if it's creative, relevant, and understandable.
Arguments: Not card heavy, statistics can be overbearing (use them sparingly but effectively) Logic sprinkled with facts to back it up.
CX: Be polite and effective.
Rebuttals: Act as though you are a surgeon, systematically explain and refute your opponent's thought process one clear step at a time. Be organized.