Central Texas District Tournament
2020 — US
Elizabeth Contreras Paradigm
In PF, I firmly believe quality of speech is just as important as the quality of the content. That being said, quality of speech will only affect speaker points, not my final ballot decision. In terms of content, I like to see well constructed cases extended through the entirety of the round. Start strong, finish strong. It's also vital that arguments be extended through the entire round or they will be considered dropped. I advise against collapsing on a single argument or contention but if it's well developed and defended enough, then it can work in your favor. In general, I'll vote for any kind of argument but what matters most to me are clear and concise impacts. I like a good impact weighing in the last speeches as well as voters. Speed is fine but again- quality of speech is important to me. I also listen closely to crossfire and love to see the questions asked during cx be brought up in the subsequent speeches.
I'm gradually becoming more open to theory in PF so if you feel like your link chains are solid, I'm ready to hear them.
I don't like speed, I don't want to hear spreading. while reading case, you shouldn't be close to spreading. however, if you need to speak quickly in rebuttal, summary and final focus to extend/respond, i am okay with it.
Also I don't shake hands but I promise I still respect and value you.
* it is really important to me that you are respectful to each other in round. respect your partner, respect your opponents and respect me. debate is a space for education. *
Jude McClaren Paradigm
In all honesty, I'm a pretty traditional judge. I love to hear evidence that is empirical and quantifiable. I also like to see competitors who are genuinely debating, not just being an advocate for some author and reading evidence the whole round. I want to know why you're making the world a better place. I mainly vote on impacts.
I understand you have to speak faster than normal to get through your case, but please, don't spread. I also love to see competitors who are impassioned and genuinely look like they care about what they're debating. Also, remember that presentation is something that includes body language, facial expressions, gestures, etc.
A note on PF:
The way that I was taught, PF at its core is in its name, public forum. Which means it's an event that is accessible to everyone. This is not LD & CX so any plans won't be flowed.
Caleb Newton Paradigm
Sophie Nguyen Paradigm
Make everything clear
I do flow :-)
Katherine O'Neal Paradigm
I am a traditional judge but, I will vote on progressive arguments if I feel like they are appropriately used in round and are executed properly. I prefer logical arguments made over the number of cards read. Speed is acceptable and can be used in round, however I will stop flowing and put my pen down if I can not understand the debater. I mainly vote on arguments that have tangible impacts or that uphold the framework. I do not like to vote on arguments made about abuse or time suck. If you have questions about my paradigms, feel free to ask me to clarify before rounds.
Evan Ortiz Paradigm
Saskia Reford Paradigm
Hi! I'm Saskia and I did debate at Saint Mary's Hall in Texas for 7 years.
I did a lot of events in debate, including some PF. My tech understanding is pretty limited, so please don’t get bogged down in a bunch of jargon because I won’t understand it most likely. If you explain things well you can go pretty fast and I’ll be able to follow it. I won’t pay attention to crossfire and I will give 30s unless you are super mean/racist/homophobic/sexist etc.
Good luck and have fun!!
This is one of her former teammates — I do PF and I would call Saskia a very smart lay/flay judge. If you explain things well and make sense you’ll be fine.
Meera Sam Paradigm
Impact calculus is important to me, I want to see a clear weighing of the both worlds. I like clean, down the flow debate with a lot of clash. Sign-post during speeches.