I am a flow judge, please sign post and tell me where things should go on my flow.

Impact analysis, tell me why it is important and why I should weigh it in to the round.

CX: please ask important questions and not just go down the flow and sit down, if you need clarification ask, but ask other questions as well. Please reference CX during the debate if it is something that should go on my flow.

- Best debater in Utah for 5 years straight

- Spreading is required

- I do not know what the EU is and I am not willing to learn

- Climate change outweighs. Paper flows are an automatic loss

- “Pre-Med” is a trigger word and a voting issue

- Cross-ex is the only thing I flow

- Everyone starts with 0 speaks and gets +1 every time they say, “brief off-time road map"

- If the other team finishes a CX sentence you’re doing something wrong.

- If it’s not extinction is it even an impact?

.

.

jkjkjkjkjk....unless...?

.

.

Here's my actual paradigm lol

- I competed in public forum debate for 3 years.

- I can handle some speed, but I'm not a big fan of spreading.

- I enjoy both traditional and progressive arguments, but keep in mind that public forum is an event that should be accessible to all people.

- Be respectful of the other team!

- Use clear link chains.

- Don't bring up new arguments in final focus. I won't weigh them¯\_(ツ)_/¯

-Consider me a lay judge, never did debate in highschool, but have been judging for couple of years. Primarily debates. (mostly policy.)

Policy

- I don't need to be shared on the email chain.

- neg should spend time defending their arguments as well. If you only have offense, but none of it is upheld in your speeches, I can't flow it through.

- Don't Tell me that because your impact is bigger then the other team and that's why you should win the round, unless you give me why you won the warrant battle first. Warrants give you access to your impacts, so if you lose the warrant battle, the impact does not matter.

- I have dealt with enough spreading to get by, but if you are terrible at it, I probably can't understand what you are saying, so I won't be able to flow it.

- Sometimes, new debate jargon still confuses me. If you are using jargon, don't just assume I know what it means.

- as a lay judge, it's easier to kind of rap my head around on case arguments a bit better. I will weigh K's and theory, but Its a risk to run them with me. ( Oh, and I hate when people use the"I'ts bad for the debate space" argument.

-honestly, I'm pretty chill with most things. Just have fun.

I did debate for three years in high school, pf all three.

I'm okay with speed, just be sure you're clear so that I can understand you.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE signpost. if you don't I won't know where you are, so I won't know where to flow, and if I don't know where to flow I won't be able to flow, and then it might look like you dropped arguments when you really didn't. Moral of the story; it'll make everyone's lives a whole lot easier if you just signpost so we all are in the clear.

I don't flow cross ex, but I do (mostly) pay attention. That being said, don't rely on me to write down anything important that comes up. If you think it's important and you want me to have it on my flow, bring it up in your speeches.

I like clash. Note that there is a fine line between clash and being a dick; don't cross it.

Please time yourselves because I don't want to. It's a good idea to time your opponents as well, but that's up to you.

GIVE ME CLEAR VOTERS/IMPACTS. By the time it gets to the final speech, there should be a couple clear reasons on why I should vote for you, lay them out for me clearly. It makes it a lot easier to decide who to vote for when the main impacts are clearly given to me at the end.

Experience: I did public forum throughout high school. I finished my debate career with 1123 NSDA points and an Outstanding Distinction. My partner and I took first place at the Utah 5A state tournament in 2018. I also competed in world schools debate at the 2018 National Tournament. I am currently a law student at the University of Utah

Paradigms: Stick to your framework, far too often I've seen teams drop their framework while focusing solely on attacking that of their opponents. While going on the offensive in a framework argument can many times be necessary, make sure you uphold your own before anything else.

My biggest pet peeve is an argument that relies entirely on complex link chains that are supported by poor reasoning. If you want to tell me that drug smuggling in Nicaragua will lead to nuclear war between France and Russia, you better have good sources and sound reasoning to strengthen those links. I'm not going to flow through any cause and effect arguments unless you walk me through every individual cause and effect in your link chain. Keep your sources up to date and make sure you can defend them because if there is any doubt I will ask for them.

That being said, don't just throw a bunch of sources at me and expect your arguments to flow through. You have to show me the impact the information you are showing me has on the debate, and you need to show me the source is relevant. When referencing sources in your speeches try not to just throw out a million author names because that is meaningless to me. Be specific in telling me what sources you are referencing.

I can handle some speed but keep in mind I debated public forum, if I can't keep up with what you are saying I'll ask you to slow down but after that I'll only flow what I can understand.

Try to sign post and let me know where your argument is headed.

I put a lot of importance into your ability to perform well in cross. Avoid asking stupid questions such as ones that begin with "How do you feel about" and the like. There should be some good clash in crossfire so don't let yourself get run over by your opponents but also don't grill them so hard that they can't answer the question. I pay very close attention to cross and the questions raised during it just make sure to bring up everything important that happened in it during your speeches.

Congress: Clear contentions, stated clearly, well supported by citations. (ie, Contention 1 or My first Contention). Do not make me try to figure out what you are wanting to say. If examples are used, back up the example with a legitimate source. Ask intelligent, to the point questions. Answer questions efficiently without a bunch of fluff. If you don't know the answer or don't have the support for the answer, I will know it. Don't waste my time or yours bluffing around. Civility is paramount. Do not talk over each other, that is rude.

I am a high school teacher. I have a degree in theater, psychology and English. I took debate all four years in high school and have been head coach for state champion speech and LD teams for years. I competed equally in policy and in Interp events.

I can follow most spreading, but I would rather not.

I am not a fan pf progressive debate - no performance or outrageous K's.

I appreciate the ability of a debater to think logically for themselves and not regurgitate cases written solely through purchased evidence files or a college coach. With that said however, you better have more than analytics to back up your arguments.

I typically won't vote for lack of fair education - unless the other team is very egregious is their abuse.

In partner debates I expect each partner to debate strong enough on their own that tag-teaming is not necessary.

I expect debaters to frame their arguments with a weighing mechanism with which you want me to view the round. Tell me why your argument is better - don't expect me to to just get it. If you want me to judge based on your defined values, you better explicitly state them.

You could win ten arguments to their six, but if their six have more weight, you will still lose.

I competed in Public Forum all three years of my high school career.

Due to the nature of this type of debate, I am looking for simple and persuasive arguments formed in a cohesive manner. Keep in mind the following to better know my personal approach:

I highly encourage and value step by step progression in arguments, especially when competitors are attempting to discredit or overcome an opponent's arguments.

Please take control of the round without being dominating.

Understand I am not evaluating the most persuasive case by nature, rather how the argument is presented. The easiest side to convey and for the rational person to agree with will not be outcome determinative of my decision for the side that wins the round. Rather, I will be basing my decision on who presented the most effective argument.

If you have any specific questions, please ask in round.

I don't disclose. I don't ask for evidence. I don't accept post-rounding. The round should be controlled by debaters, and anything that you feel is important to earning my ballot needs to be addressed in the round. Once completed, the round is out of sight and mind. Any critiques I have will go on the ballot. No one's opinion is worth an additional ten minutes of hearing themselves talk.

While I am flexible in terms of argumentation style, for PF and LD, I prefer traditional arguments. It's super easy to rest on jargon and to vomit a case. Brevity is becoming a lost skill in debate, and I like seeing it. If you think you can win on progressive arguments regardless, please present them.

In Policy and PF, I judge almost entirely on impact and framework. In LD, VC gets a little more weight, naturally. Voters are super helpful. Anything you drop is weighed against you.

Topicality is annoying, so please avoid running it. If you think you can swing Theory, do your darnedest. Kritiks are cool, too.

If you want to do speed, that's fine, but anything I can't understand can't go on my flow, and I'm not gonna correct you. You're in charge of your own performance.

FLASHING COMES OUT OF PREP, unless done before the 1AC. Also, if your preflow takes more than five minutes, I will dock speaks for each additional minute.

Clashing and some aggressiveness is fine, but if you're scoffing or snickering at any opponent, I'm going to be especially motivated to find reasons to drop you, obviously. Even if I like your argument or pick you up, I'm probably going to give you really low speaks. Respect the fact that your opponents also work hard to be in the same room as you.

When I call "time," nothing you say gets added to the flow. Simply stop speaking, because it's not going to be counted. No exceptions.

Most of all, if you have me as your judge, relax. It is debate. You're not defusing a bomb. You're not performing neurosurgery. You'll make it out of the round alive, and you'll probably go on to debate many other rounds. You want to do well, and a lot goes into that. You will be okay, regardless of how I vote.

Miscellaneous items that won't decide around, but could garner higher speaks

-Uses of the words, and various thereof, "flummoxed," "cantankerous," "trill," "inconceivable, "verisimilitude," and "betwixt"

-Quotes from television series Community, Steven Universe, Friday Night Lights, Arrested Development, and 30 Rock

-Knowing the difference between "asocial" and "antisocial"

-Rhyming

All throughout high school I competed in PF. If you do not flow through arguments I will drop them from mine. Be cordial, assertiveness is okay within reason, speed not spewing. Just follow the rules.

A little bit about me:

Debated Public Forum for 4 years in high school.

I am addicted to chapstick, (Burt's bees) so if I put on chapstick a lot during the round that's why.

I want to be your friend, probably.

Judging style:

Be respectful to each other, but I like a little sass lol.

I don't flow cross and usually don't listen.

Be sure to weigh for me so I don't have to.

Warrants are essential. If you can't back up your evidence with logical reasoning and warrants then the argument is not an argument at all.

Defense is key. Frontlining in second rebuttal is ideal.

I enjoy unique arguments, but your link chain needs to be established clearly. I won't weigh arguments that don't make sense.

I am fine with speed as long as you can be understood by the opponents and myself.

Sign posting is a MUST. Roadmaps should not be longer than 5 seconds.

Don't ignore contradicting evidence and continue to restate your evidence as an answer, INTERACT with your opponents evidence and explain why I prefer yours over theirs. Same goes for warrants. PLEASE compare your warrants and why I prefer yours over theirs.

I am a fan of organization in your speeches. Tell me where you are going. I lose a lot of motivation to flow if you jump around randomly every .2 seconds.

I don't want to be confused at the end of the round. Make sure your FF is clear.

If your opponents are saying something abusive or untrue, there is no need to get visibly frustrated to let me know what they are saying isn't right. Like you I also have ears, so take a deep breath and maintain your composure. I will catch it.

Please don't take 78483927 years to pull up your evidence. I will be very very sad. :/

When you are reading evidence you need to take prep! I'm really not out here tryna stay in one round for 2 hours.

You can run anything as long as it makes sense, but as a PSA I do not have a lot of experience with theory or K's, so if you run theory, you better approach it as if you are explaining it to a white suburban mother of 6.

PLEASE make the round fun. I beg of you. If you make me laugh, I will increase your speaker points by 0.2

These are super basic principles, so if you have detailed questions you can email me at hunterjakesteele@gmail.com

What I like:

- Cool frameworks and different kinds of weighing mechanisms

- Well-timed wit

- Explaining what your evidence means in the context of the round

- Signposting

- Being unique

- Being kind

What I don't like:

- Unclear link chains/not talking about your link chain and just saying stuff will happen

- Unproductive cross x. If neither of you have questions that's okay, just call it early.

- Yelling/being mean

Speed:

- Slow down a little for tags

- If I can't understand you, I'll put my pen down - or if it's online I'll use the raise hand feature.

How I vote:

- The only work that I should be doing is flowing and keeping track of what is dropped and what isn't.

- Tell me why your arguments are more important.

Feel free to talk to me after the round.