FAQ and Pet Peeves:

You can call me Judge or Ms. Adint.

I have about 2 years of judging experience thanks to my child having been into speech and debate just like you.

Please don’t shake my hand. "Hello, judge", will do to greet me.

On the big question of framework, I vote either way often.

All arguments are winnable, just provide me ample evidences with logical countering.

politeness is a plus.

Speed is good.

Overview:

I value reliable evidences and authenticity of each debater’s argument. I am open to any kind of strategy that will help you win, but round voice will not change my vote. Countering is the beauty of debate, so please counter your opponent with evidences and critical thinking skills. I will end the debate in favor of one proposition resolved only by the argument in the round. I want debaters speak their mind the way they see fit.

I am a lay/parent judge. I am not comfortable with spreading. I'd prefer you to speak at a moderate speed and clearly, so I can understand your argument. Please do not run K's, theories, or topicalities. Please include me in your email chains uma_adira@yahoo.com.

Hello all, I am a parent judge and I have been judging LD, PF, and other individual events for the last 3-4 years.

DECISION:My decision evaluates all scopes of the debate: framework, arguments, reasoning, evidence, links, etc. However, telling me why your IMPACTS are important and how you better achieve them than your opponent is key for you to win this debate. I do not care about what kind of impacts you give me, but it would be good if you start out with specifics and then at the end you summarize with broad ones so I know where you are deriving your impacts from.

FLOWING: I will flow a line-by-line analysis, however, I prefer OVERVIEWS (not only in your 2ars or 2nrs) because they clear things up for me and make the ballot easier too.

OTHER PREFERENCES: For speaking, please speak clearly and speak to the point. In terms of speed, please do NOT SPREAD . If you speak marginally fast or faster than conversational, it is okay as long as you slow down at the impactful parts, tags, numbers you want me to flow, etc. Do NOT RUN THEORY because I will probably not understand it or flow it. By chance if I do flow part of your theory argument , it will not be a major evaluation in the debate and I will probably just ignore it.

HAVE FUN DEBATING ;)

I'm a parent judge and have judged LD debates.

If I understand your arguments, I will be able to judge more effectively so appreciate clarity.

Thank you for being a courteous participant.

Lay judge with limited experience.

Suggestions for contestants: Be respectful, stick to the facts, watch the timer.

I am a parent and have recently started judging(only since this year).

I want contestants to be courteous and respectable. Its ok to be aggressive but not rude.

I want both sides to present with clear arguments with valid supporting evidence. Keep it simple. If I don't understand the argument, it will become hard to me to vote for it. Explain everything thoroughly and focus more on content and evidence.

i dont usually disclose the results immediately
Have fun at your rounds!

First time parent judge. Good luck!

I follow the flay pattern. I like to focus on the flow of the argument and also place emphasis on the presentation of the content.

Ideally, each contention should be called out before you deep-dive into it so that I can correlate the substance/examples of your argument to your contention.

If the above is taken care of, I can easily make out what you are presenting, regardless of whether you speak fast or slow.

In CX, please be courteous to your opponent and allow them to finish responding to your question(s).

UPDATE FOR CAL 2021:

This is my first time judging this season— please define topic-specific abbreviations if you plan on using them frequently. Please record speeches locally and be ready to send them in the event that a tech issue should arise.

-

Hello!

I am a parent/lay judge.

If you have me as a judge, your best strategy is to read the most stock arguments your team has and do strong weighing in the 2NR/2AR.

Please explain arguments clearly— I will not vote on blips/arguments that I do not understand.

Be polite and respectful of your opponents.

Slow down when you read and be clear in the last speech.

It is in your best interest to not use buzzwords or jargon.

I'm Andrew Chen and my son does LD debate. Although I don't require you to do these, it will make judging much easier and it will give you a bigger chance of winning. :-)

1. ABSOLUTELY NO SPREADING. If I cannot understand you, then I simply stop flowing and you'll probably lose.

2. Don't be too aggressive, or I'll have a bad impression of you.

3. Make sure to keep eye contact with me, especially during cross examination.

4. During cross examination, do not argue. If you want my ballot, you just need to prove your side is better than the other. There is no need to yell.

5. Make sure to cite your sources, or I'll think that you made them up.

6. I allow a 10-15 second grace period for the constructive and rebuttals. For cross examination, finish your question and I will allow the other person to answer that question.

7. At the end, you need to CLEARLY tell me why your side has won.

Make sure to shake hands with each other and me at the end of each debate.

IMPORTANT: DO NOT COME LATER THAN THE STARTING TIME UNLESS THERE IS A DELAY!!!

Having a well prepared case, being organized, and following these preferences will give you the biggest chance of winning!

I WILL NOT DISCLOSE!!!

GOOD LUCK! :)

Inspired by an unwavering commitment to fairness, equity, and a genuine interest in fostering positive change, I am guided by the belief that every individual deserves equal opportunities and representation. I judge others by their effort to get their point across while being respectful and acknowledging of the other point of view. The arguments should seek to convince based on facts, responsible logic and a clear thought process.

I like extremely well-structured and thought out arguments.

Please avoid Ks, Theory, or any type of LARP debate and please stick to the lay to ensure a higher chance of getting my vote!

Please extend your arguments, so I can understand why you win a certain point or a certain topic.

My preferences as your judge are:

1. Speak at your normal pace, not too quickly

2. Enunciate clearly and define unfamiliar terms- I may not be familiar with the topic

3. Do a short wrap up of your main points at the end of each timed section.

Parent judge in 5th year of judging. Has judged almost entirely LD, with a 1-2 PF and Policy rounds as well.

Argumentation:

Truth > tech. I prefer realistic, well-warranted impacts over blippy extinction link chains. If I don't buy it, I won't vote on it. Avoid Ks, T, and all other "circuit" debate argumentation, I will not know how to evaluate them.

Logical responses are also important to me - if something your opponent says is simply illogical or contradictory, call them out on this, even if their argument is warranted. It shows that you are able to think critically and not just regurgitate evidence.

Evidence quality is very important to me. Please provide full author citations. Smith 19 doesn't tell me anything - Smith could be your neighbour for all I know. I love to see comparison and indicting of evidence as it shows me that you are well prepared and know the topic literature.

Speaking/round etiquette:

Please do not speak too fast and sign post clearly. I am flowing and will evaluate on argumentation, but if I cannot understand what you are saying I cannot flow or vote on it.

Please be respectful in round. It makes for a good debate experience for both the debaters and the judge. Speaks WILL be docked for rudeness.

A little about me:

Currently coaching: Sage Hill School 2021-Present

Past Coaching: Diamond Ranch HS 2015-2020

I also tab more tournaments, but I keep up with my team so I can follow many of the trends in all events.

-

I prefer all of my speakers to make sure that any contentions, plans or the like are clear and always link back to the topic at hand. You're free to run theory or K at your peril. I've heard great rounds on Afro-pessimism and bad rounds on it. I've loved a round full of theory and hated rounds full of theory. All depends on how it's done, and what the point of it.

I am a social studies teacher, so I can't unknow the rules of American government or economics. Don't attempt to stay something that is factually inaccurate that you would know in your classes.

Be respectful of all parties in the room - your opponent(s), your partner (if applicable) and the judge. Hurtful language is in not something I tolerate. Pronouns in your names are an added plus.

Speaking clearly, even if fast, is fine, but spreading can be difficult to understand, especially through two computers. I will say "Clear" if I need to. In an online format, please slow down for the first minute if possible. I haven't had to listen to spreading with online debate.

For LD, I don't mind counterplans and theory discussions as long as they are germane to the topic and as long as they don't result in debating the rules of debate rather than the topic itself. In the last year most of my LD rounds have not been at TOC bid tournaments, but that doesn't mean I can't follow most arguments, but be patient as I adjust.

Truth > tech.

*It's work to make me vote on extinction or nuclear war as a terminal impact in any debate. That link chain needs to be solid if you're doing to expect me to believe it.*

In PF, make sure that you explain your terminal impacts and tell me why I should weight your impacts vs your opponents' impacts.

WSD - I have been around enough tournaments to know what I should hear and I will notice if you're not doing it well. Thinking global always. Models should always be well explained and match the focus on the round. Fiat is a tricky thing in the event now but use it as you see fit.

To whom it may concern,

I am a parent judge, with ZERO experience judging.

Below is some things my son suggests:

1) speak clearly, and at a normal pace

2) weigh arguments, and explain why you are winning the round.
3) please explain your arguments, make sure they are logical...

4) the final speeches should have clear voters, explaining why you won.
5) refute line by line, but also big-picture

5.5) please signpost and give off time roadmaps.

6) I will be judging on speaking AND content

7) do not run Ks, DAs, theory, or anything of the sort.

8) I will not be disclosing after the round

If the topic is complicated and less in news, it is OK to spend a few moments educating the audience/me (judge). If providing context helps you build foundation for your arguments, go for it.

Quickly listing your position/arguments during the debate a few times is a good strategy. Ability to list, at a high level, your arguments and what you have covered helps the judge and you. It also reflects a methodical approach on your part.

If you have limited number of arguments, it is OK. You can explain why your argument(s) have the weight and why your argument(s) matter more than the number of arguments that the other side may be making.

If you notice that the other team introduced a new argument late in the debate and/or cited a source, when sources are not to be given credit for (say, in late rounds), I would notice that too. You are free to point out. I would prefer that you make your point quickly, and move to discussing substance. Also, you are free to tell me what arguments "flow" and what do not. As I am listening, I am making up my mind and such suggestions form the speaker do not generally make a difference in how I perceive the debate.

Above everything else, I look for:

* how you assign weight to your arguments,

* how critically you think about the impact of both side

* do you acknowledge obvious weaknesses and weigh them against the benefits

* how well you address what your opponents bring up

Many times, I do not know immediately at the end of the round who the winner is going to be. I take notes aggressively during each round. I review my notes after the round, some times agonize, and then decide. Regardless, of when I make up my mind, I do not prefer to share the results immediately after the round with the teams.

I've been in debate for a little over a decade now as a high school policy debater, coach for numerous teams across multiple events, as well as professionally at the Bay Area Urban Debate League. Essentially, do what you want. Debate is a unique educational and competitive space, please make the most of it. I will vote on most things if you give me a good enough reason. I do not lean towards traditional or K/performative debate. Both are good and valuable. Again, do what you want. Have fun. Be nice to each other.

Go ahead and add me to whatever email chain: gabriel.gangoso@gmail.com

Flex prep is fine. In's and Out's are fine. Any other practices like this are probably fine. If you don't recognize these terms don't worry about them.

I am a lay/parent judge. I will flow your arguments to the best of my ability. Please do not spread. I prefer if you would speak at a moderate speed and clearly so that I can understand your argument.

Hi- I am Raghav. I am a lay judge but I have been judging for the last three years.

I want to see you having fun. Don't be rude or speak over each other. Please make sure you enunciate and speak slowly. I really can't flow or score your argument if I can't understand what you are saying. Instead of long rants I value more you make a concise argument that is valid, relevant and useful.

Please start an email chain BEFORE the debate starts. Include me. My email is: raghav01@yahoo.com

Best of luck and have fun!!

Hi.

I'm new to judging and appreciate if you could talk slowly and elaborate on your arguments. It would be beneficial to make yourself clear during your off-time road map as well. I don't mind if you stand or sit as long as I can hear you and write notes on the topic. Again, I cannot emphasize how important it is for you to not rush yourself as I will not be able to judge you properly otherwise. Thank you, and I wish you the best of luck in the debate!

I'm a parent judge, and my child is doing Lincoln Douglas debate since last year. I would love the participants to speak clearly and articulate their viewpoints well. I will pay close attention to CX and rebuttal. During CX, don't contend, demonstrate your side is better than the other. If needed, I can give 15-25 seconds grace period for rebuttal and summary.

Please be polite and respect each other. In the end, I would love to hear why your side has won.

Hello!

I am a parent judge. I prefer well-articulated arguments with clear impacts delivered at a moderate speed.

Please do not spread, or run kritiks, counterplans/plans, theory or topicality.

I have not done independent research on this topic, so make sure to impact your arguments and have clear tags and voting issues. I prefer a thoughtful, analytical rebuttal to a rapid evidence dump.

The biggest thing is to be respectful to your opponent. Yelling does not win you arguments, nor does it gain you many speaker points. Other than that, debate to the best of your ability! I look forward to judging your round!

I'm a parent judge and this is my 4th year judging. I have judged Lincoln Douglas and Public Forum at both the novice and varsity level for middle and high school students

I'm fine with any speed as long as you are articulate

I expect debaters to keep track of their own time

I do take notes and highlight the basis for my winner selection. I also tend to advice on how to improve for future debates

I value respectful tone and attitude when debating

Hi.

I'm new to judging and appreciate if you could talk slowly and elaborate on your arguments. It would be beneficial to make yourself clear during your off-time road map as well. I don't mind if you stand or sit as long as I can hear you and write notes on the topic. Again, I cannot emphasize how important it is for you to not rush yourself as I will not be able to judge you properly otherwise. I am a parent judge, so I will not understand any circuit arguments. If you run circuit arguments or something that I cannot understand, I will not evaluate this argument in the debate. Thank you, and I wish you the best of luck!

Traditional flow judge. No spreading. Keep it slow please. I like substantive debates.

This is Shailender Karmuchi working as the Principal Software Manager at Samsung. Though my background is the software I have been doing Judges for the Debate tournaments for the past three years as my daughter is very fascinated about the debate tournaments.

Hello, I'm an Architect by profession and have been judging debate events fo the past 2 years. Please be clear and loud. Do not speak too fast.

I judge on how well you are organized, how well you support your points, how well you refute your opponent's points, and your speaking skills.

I'd vote for students who are knowledgeable and have researched well and speak in relevance to the discussion, instead of simply reading out from a paper. Please try to ensure that I understand what you are saying.

Please speak at a moderate pace. Please say your speeches as though you are explaining something to me about a topic that I am not much aware of. Honestly, I have very little experience on the topic and I have not researched on the topic like a debater. So, please explain to me with evidence and name it clearly. If I cannot understand you then it will be difficult for me to vote you.

For speaker points, strong assertive voice, clarity of speech are important. All the best,

I am a lay judge, so please don’t no spreading, no debate jargon, kritiks, or theory. Signposting is incredibly helpful and appreciated. If you would like, feel free to make an off time roadmap before starting each of your speeches. Crystallization, links, voter issues, and connecting your case back to your value and value criterion are all very important to me. Speak clearly, and don’t be excessively aggressive, but taking control in prep time is ok. Enunciating certain words or phrases is fine. Be polite and respectful to each other. I will give you an extra 0.25 speaker points if you make some sort of pun in your crystallization speech.

Parent judge. Argument should be precise and clean. Try not to repeat yourself too much. No spreading. Being passionate is great in cross examination but not too aggressive.

Gina Li is a strategy, merger and acquisition professional with 20+ years working experiences in various sectors. She was an expat working abroad for 15 years with global perspectives. She has been judging both Public Forum and Lincoln Douglas since 2018 at various events, in addition to facilitate local student-run speech and debate volunteer activities in the bay area.

She requires all contestants to speak clearly, not necessarily faster the better, try to maximize the given time to rationalize the best data and evidences to support the key arguments. While majority of the contestants are well prepared on their contentions, the winner normally possess the abilities in better framework, effective arguments to counter opponents positions during rebuttal, crossfires and closing. Also please RESPECT your opponents, try not to cut them off if possible.

Knowing everyone is working very hard on each tournament, I wish each contestant the best luck!

I am a parent judge.

I will drop you if you spread or run theory. I cannot evaluate circuit LD.

Signpost so I know where you are on the flow. Make sure to impact your arguments well.

Be respectful and courteous to your opponent.

Judge based on facts, logic reasoning, protocol compliance, presentation, professionalism, etiquette but not on preconception.

Competed in varsity PF. Not super experienced on M4A topic, but I will flow so treat me like a flay judge. Speed is fine, but the slower you talk the better my flow.

Let me know if you have any questions before the round!

Experience:

• University of Wyoming policy debater & coach
• UC Berkeley policy coach
• Judging CARD for 3+ years (critic of the year in 2022)

CARD is not policy debate by design. I want to be moved and persuaded by your arguments, which you can't do if you are reading or speaking fast and using a bunch of technical jargon. Keep this activity accessible.

Read any style of arguments you want (kritical, policy, lived experience), but relate them to the topic. If you want to read an untopical affirmative then get ready to impact-turn and tell me why your arguments are important for this specific activity.

The 2NR and 2AR are for telling me exactly why you won the debate. A dropped argument is a true argument, but you need to tell me why that argument being true is important for your overall case (i.e. compare the quality of your arguments). Debate isn't just about winning individual arguments on the flow, but telling the judge a compelling story. An important part of telling the story is through impact calculus/comparison.

Flowing: I still prefer to flow CARD like a traditional policy round. I flow each argument on a separate page and I want to be able to line up the arguments to quickly compare them when rendering my decision. So, try to stay organized and answer the arguments in the order they were made.

Bottom line: Arguments need evidence and warrants. Keep it cute, don't post-round me.

Happy to answer any questions before the round begins.

I am a first-year judge, and am not experienced with technical debate. Please explain your arguments very clearly. Provide logic, evidence, and analysis for each argument. Please be courteous and I am looking forward to watching your debates! :)

I am a parent judge. I cannot understand when a contestant spreads so please don't spread as if I do not hear or understand your arguments you will not get credit for it.

Keep a calm poise / demeanor, and don't be aggressive towards other contestant.

General Guidelines: Speak clearly. Avoid spreading. I flow the arguments reasonably. Signposts are appreciated.

Don'ts:

Don't bring new arguments/refutations in your last speech unless it is to address the opponent's previous speech.

Don't overstate (e.g opponent don't have evidence or didn't address - if they actually have or did) - especially in final speech of the debate (when your opponent doesn't have chance to respond).

Winner: Main decision factor for me to decide on who wins is based upon which contentions are remaining (and their impact). If that does not decide a clear winner, how convincing the arguments were (including evidence), how well you understand the case (both sides - to defend yours and weaken opponents), debating skills (cross ex, rebuttal, summary) will play a role.

Speaker Points: I assign speaker points based according to tournament guidelines.

Feedback: I want to really help the contestants to do better in their remaining rounds and future debates. So I give feedback after the rounds orally (unless time pressed) and don't disclose results unless needed.

First off, I only have a couple of years judging debate tournaments. I ask the following from the debaters during the round in order to best conclude who the winner of the round may be.

1. I would encourage the debaters to speak at a moderate pace and make sure to emphasize your key points during the round for me to better understand your case.
2. Emphasize the impact of your evidence more than the evidence itself. I will give great value to the evidence provided in your case but I will remember the impact that your evidence has to the rest of your case more.
3. Make sure that your case is consistent and well rounded. One of the key points I take down is how strong your case is and how well your crystallization. I will rely on your main points of your case through your crystallization, so make sure to be able to explain all of your evidence and contentions well.
4. Steps to win my ballot: Please communicate clearly and stay organized. Defend your points well not only with restating your previous arguments but to link to main idea and impacts. Make sure to weigh your impact with the opponents impact. Be constructive and respective of your opponent since I value debate to be constructive and engaging.

I am new in judging and still forming my own paradigm.

Here are something I value in your debate:

- be respectful to your opponent.

- clarity and logic in your reasoning

- evidence must be cited

Looking forward to seeing you at your debate.

Do your best!!!

I am a parent judge. You may talk at any speed you are comfortable with and just be yourself.

I am a parent judge with little experience in judging.

Would be focusing on the argument data-points and how each of this are presented, argued and counter-argued. Also, would focus on presentation and interaction styles. I will not vote for anything I do not understand.

Looking forward to meet you all.

cheers!!

I'm a lay, parent judge. This is my third year judging Lincoln Douglas Debate. I have judged both Novice and Varsity: however, I do not understand spreading or progressive arguments. I prefer the typical conversational speed. The rate of delivery doesn't weigh heavily on my decision as long as I'm able to understand. Some tips that you might want to take into consideration are:

1. Being assertive is good, but please don't be offensive or overly aggressive.

2. I like a great Cross-Examination.

3. Having good evidence comparison is an added bonus, don't just take into account that evidence is right on face

4. Framework debate is good, but I don't understand complex philosophies, so you will have to explain it very well

5. Please talk clearly and slowly.

Presentation '19, Stanford '23

pronouns: she/her

email chain - nina.tutu10@gmail.com

I debated in both Policy and LD for 3 years at Presentation High School. Was mainly a 2a but my speaker position varied quite a bit.

Do what you want, I'm here to listen. (As long as you're respectful).

My background: identity debate - read a performance aff my junior and senior years. I can probably keep up with most straight-up/policy rounds, but if you're thinking about exploring a new route don't be afraid to do so in front of me.

LD: The closer this debate is to policy the better. I'm super into kritikal arguments and think they can be executed super strategically in LD. That being said, I won't understand any of your tricks/phil/friv theory - please avoid at all costs.

I am a parent judge with 5 years of experience.

I expect the participants to speak slow but most importantly clearly

I want to understand the debate so explaining arguments help me understand why you should win more.

Respect other participants and I will respect you

add me to any email chains

ajayrawal@hotmail.com

I am a parent judge. Here are my preferences for the round.

-Avoid technical terms (like the TULI format). Instead, just guide me through your case and explain the points.

-Speak slowly. If I cannot understand you, I cannot flow what you are saying and I will just end up ignoring what you said.

-Avoid running Theory or Ks. If you chose to, be as clear as possible or just explain it without the technical terms. Perms are 100% okay, but still explain without the technical terms.

-I will vote on whichever side provides the best logical arguments + warrants to back it up!

-Enjoy and Have Fun during the tournaments !

1. Speak clearly (no mumbling/spreading)

2. Offtime roadmaps are helpful

3. Maintain a clear speech order (do not jump around from contentions to refutations to standard, etc.)

4. Time yourself

I am a lay judge who has judged at a few tournaments this year.

Most importantly, before all else, be kind and respectful to your opponents. Though this is a stressful activity, do your best to maintain a kind attitude towards your opponent.

As I am a lay judge, please simplify the round for me. Make it clear why you should win the round and present it to me consistently.

Please no spreading, kritiks, counterplans, plans, etc.

Speak slow and steady, do not rush yourself.

Most importantly do not stress yourself out, and try to enjoy the round

I start judging several years ago as a parent. I found speech and debate as a very interesting competition when logic and evidence are work together to make debates a fun process. I really enjoy it.

I am logic oriented, so I prefer students bringing evidences using reliable sources. It is also good to have 2-3 independent sources. Please do not rush and keep good pace in arguing.

Here is my judging history

Tournament Year Dates Division Rounds CFL SuperDebate 2 Milpitas 2020 1/25 -1/25 Public Forum Judges 5 CFL State Quals PFParli 2017 3/3 -3/4 Public Forum 3

I have been judging for over three years and have judged, in addition to preliminary rounds, many ellimination rounds at Berkley, SCU and Stanford etc . I prefer clear and steady tone, distinct articulation of contention(s) and related sub-points.

I prefer fluency and clarity over speed. Speaking too fast and squeezing too much information within the limited time often makes the audience lost in appreciating the key points in your argument.

Body language and self-confidence play important roles in debates.

I am a lay parent judge and have judged debates for two years. I prefer to see no spreading, civility in arguments, and clear and confident delivery.

I have served as a Speech and Debate judge since 2017. I will flow in debate, and prefer a well-paced presentation, with clear logic behind evidence. Eye contact helps as well.

*** Note: Instead of an email chain, I prefer you create a public Google doc (that anyone can access) to share your evidence this avoids the delays of email. Please post the doc link in the chat before the round; Be prepared to post evidence requested in a very timely manner and be selective of what you ask for. If you're reading evidence, you are expected to produce the card as soon as you're asked. Recently, rounds have been taking too long, and it seems like some teams are turning evidence sharing into extra prep time!

---------------------------------------------

I'm a parent judge. Been judging for the last 6 years. My kids did/do Public Forum. I was a policy debater in high school, and judged a few tournaments in college. Keep in mind that was several decades ago.

So far, my judging experience has been mostly Public Forum, some Parli, less Policy, and even less LD.

1) Have fun. Enjoy every round. Make friends between rounds. I met my best friends from high school on the team.

2) Assume that I'm new to the topic because I AM new to the topic. Take time to convince me of your side of the resolution. If you use topic specific acronyms, make sure to define them first before using them. I will come to the round with a clean slate and judge based on what I flow

3) You can speak faster than conversational, but you NEED to be clear and articulate. Don't go faster than your ability to speak clearly and persuasively. Make eye contact with me to make sure that you can assess whether I'm keeping up with you and understanding your arguments. If I don't understand an argument, I can't vote on it

4) Whenever you can, establish frameworks to help me weigh the round

5) Help me by giving me a short roadmap before your speech. It's not required, but it can help me (and I think, you) know what you will be doing. It also helps if you are effective in signposting during your speech.

6) Be cordial and polite to each other during cross-ex and throughout the round. Being rude, offensive, or arrogant is no fun and doesn't earn you speaker points. Being polite, smart, inquisitive, and strategic does. I don't believe rounds are won/lost in cross-ex alone, but I do think that cross-ex is great place to setup your arguments through strategic questioning.

7) Help me weigh the arguments in your final speeches. Tell me why I should vote a certain way. The side that makes it easiest for the judge to evaluate why they're winning the round is often times the clearest winner.

8) I don't really care much for arguments revolving around debate theory as I'm not familiar with it, so try to avoid it if you can. I much prefer the clash over either side of the resolution.

9) Read #1 again. :-)

Just be frank, I never did debate myself and I am not an experienced judge neither. But I will try my best to be fair by looking at few key points during the debating like logical presentation, evidence and data used to support the points as well as accuracy on responding opponent's argument, also I am looking for respect and politeness during the debating.

2024- 2/4/2024

I'm not just any judge; I'm a ”cool” judge with a journey dating back to 2000. So, when you step into this arena, know that you're dealing with someone who's witnessed the ebb and flow of the debate currents over the last 2 decades. I am old.

General:
Yes you can go fast if you want to, just be clear, and loud enough for me to hear. I will be flowing along and won’t look at doc’s or cards unless warranted by y’all. I will do my best to time with you.

World Crafting:

Your task is to construct a compelling narrative, competing worlds, both sides have a world to offer, you sell it.

Argument Framing:

Frame your arguments as pillars that support the world you've built. Your job is to make me see the strategic significance of your narrative. Don't just present; show me why your world outweighs the others.

The K:

I have a soft spot, but only if done well. Critical acumen is your secret weapon. Integrate it seamlessly into your world, making it a key component of your narrative. I also am not a fan of non black POC running afropress, or similar k's, so please don’t. Other than that, no issues with K’s.

Theory:

Preemptive theory is unnecessary imo unless the topic warrants it, but most debates do not need a theory most of the time, but it is your round, so do you.

Tech vs. Truth:

Truth sometimes trumps tech, and in other rounds, tech might take the lead. But what matters most is how well your crafted world stands.

Rudeness is a No-Go:

Discourteous vibes won't elevate your speaks. For real

Impact Calculus and Critical Thinking:

Impact calculus is the key to your world's strategic significance. Dive into critical thinking, showing why your crafted universe is not just valid but important.

Authentic Knowledge Over Blocks:

Don't just parrot blocks; show genuine understanding. Bring knowledge to the forefront, not just rehearsed lines.

Voting Issues:

Present me with clean voting issues – make it glaringly apparent why your world is the one I should endorse. THERE IS NO 3NR. So please make it definitive in the last rebuttal

TL;DR

Be clear

Weigh

Impact calculus

liberal.cynic.yo@gmail.com

>If you want to add me to the chain or send hate mail.<

2023
i will flow to the best of my ability i have the carpal tunnel but can still keep up
spreading is only chill if you are clear
I don't need to be on the email chain but here it is if you feel like adding me anyway
liberal.cynic.yo@gmail.com
I am indifferent to the kind of argument you are choosing to use, i care if you understand it

ask questions

My paradigm was lost to the void, who knows what it said...

for long beach 2018
i'll make this, and fix it later

1. yes, i flow

2. yes, speed is fine

3. flashing isn't prep (unless it takes wayy to long )

4. i look at the round as competing narratives, i do not care what you run as long as you know what it is you are running

5. ask questions