1) I'm a new lay judge, no spreading, no debate words, no theory, and nothing that a day. one debater wouldn't know

2) No -ism, or -ist action otherwise you'll be dropped

3) I am not flowing the round, and please sign post by using words like "responses", "arguments ", and "defense"

4) If I cant understand what you're saying I will say clear and subtract 0.25 speaker. score

5) I value. confidence, keep cool under pressure and maintain your posture and consistent speaking speed

nathan.gong@utexas.edu / I prefer tabroom fileshare though

I qualified to the TOC three times for LD, debated twice, and cleared once (as Plano East and Plano Independent)

Read good quality evidence, be clear, compare arguments, and ballot paint!

Stop talking early when possible - I don't want to hear a 6 minute speech when a theory shell was conceded.

I can tell you speaker points after round if you want

Don't read evaluate after X

amanda072086@gmail.com
Speak clearly. Any speed is fine as long as you slow down and read your tag lines and main points very clearly. Spreading is fine. Give clear indication of when you have reached the burden you set out.

LD: I am a true values debate judge in LD. Tabula rasa judge. Flexible to any kinds of cases and arguments as long as they are respectful. If your case is not topical or abusive and your opponent argues and proves that in their speeches then I am willing to vote based on topicality, education and abuse.

PF and CX: Be respectful and cordial to your opponent. I’m open to most anything in Policy rounds. Always stay on the debate topic, don’t wander off onto an irrelevant subject because it’s more enjoyable to argue about than the topic is. Always allow your opponent the opportunity to complete their sentence before continuing to cross.
I’m a Tabula rasa Judge especially in Policy debate. If you don’t tell me how you want me to weigh the round and set a minimum burden for each side to have to meet within the round to win then I will default to judging based on the block and will turn into a games playing judge and will make voting decisions based on what my flow shows and dropped arguments or arguments that were lost or conceded will very much factor into my vote. Impacts, Warrants and links need to be made very clear, and always show me the magnitude.

I am a Parent judge. My notes focus on (1) argumentation, (2) supporting evidence. I highly value credible evidence.

Most of all, I appreciate a respectful and fun debate!

BACKGROUND:

• HS (4 years) Speech/Congress/Parli/PF. College (1 year). Speech coach (5+ years). Worked with multiple flow debate programs. Debate is fun! 

• DEBATE PHILOSOPHY:

• Debate provides students an opportunity to be passionate advocates on any given topic by means of using clear communication. Utilize unforgettable rhetoric, teach me something new, and always play by the rules. Most importantly, make sure to be extremely respectful of one another!

MY JUDGING CRITERIA:

I am heavy on flow. I love responsiveness and crystalization. Make it easy for me to follow you.

• Jargon: I’d prefer students not use it for purposes of clarity. I’m sure audience members, your judge, and your opponents would appreciate this as well. One of the main ways to receive good speaker points from me is to always treat each other with respect.

• Value: You should always link your arguments to value. Otherwise, your arguments don’t have as much weight from my view. If you can also demonstrate how your arguments work under your opponent's value, that’s a bonus.

• I appreciate off-time roadmaps. I don’t mind “spreading” (fast speaking), but make sure to slow down and enunciate tags and citations. Also, if I find the entirety of your speech to be filled with unnecessary diction, I will frown. Why? Word economy. Lastly, you will note that I stop flowing as soon as the following occurs: information previously stated is being brought up once more, I cannot understand the speaker or your argument is not making sense to me.

• Theory: Not a huge fan of T. If you decide to run theory in your case, do know that I will always make my decision based off of what I feel is most important in debate; the educational experience. I avoid making a decision based off of my own personal beliefs or experiences.

• If you decide to run a Kritik (should the tournament allow it) I would appreciate your case most if it still acknowledges the round. Stressing a K without continuing to be a part of the entire debate is too dull. Not only should you be clear as towards why the other team is diminishing the value of the debate by means of what they are communicating, but you should also demonstrate that you care about the entirety of the debate.

• Throughout the debate, you should aim for pinpointing weak arguments and fallacies. Make it easy for me to flow arguments and be specific. Refer to the flow when covering your opponent's case in rebuttals. More specifically, you should cover all sub-points mentioned in each contention.

• Often times, competitors do not cover an entire contention and generally cover an argument - no. Simplify the process of me disregarding an argument entirely. In rebuttal speeches, cover something that has not been covered before. Do not present old news to the table.

Paige Stapleton (she/her)

BACKGROUND

Juris Doctor - Santa Clara University School of Law; B.A. - Political Science - University of California, Merced

Competed in LD, PF, Parli, WSD, Impromptu in High School;WSD @ Nationals June 2017 (Birmingham, AL)

CRITERIA

• No spreading. I need to be able to understand what you are saying and I appreciate hearing the passion behind your argument as well.
• I am heavy on flow. My notes focus on (1) argumentation; and (2) supporting evidence. I highly value credible evidence.
• I appreciate a persuasive argument where evidence is not on one's side.
• Arguments should be structured as claim - warrant - impact.
• Value: Always link your arguments to value.
• Offtime roadmaps: Very much appreciated!
• Throughout the debate, you should aim for pinpointing weak arguments and fallacies. Make it easy for me to flow arguments and see where your opponent drops contentions.
• Respect during Cross-Ex is key. Remain professional. Channel your attitude into passion and confidence.
• Final focus speech: Make a convincing case as to why your impacts/value outweigh that of your opponent's.

Most of all, I appreciate a respectful and fun debate!

I will provide personal feedback if requested. Email: paigeleighstapleton@gmail.com

info:

i did 3 years of public forum debate in high school; 3x national pf champion in china
yangivy@sas.upenn.edu

but to reiterate, for pf, i:

• will flow
• tech>truth
• accept spreading (send case if >350wpm)
• accept t/k (not my favorite if you cant execute it properly)
• ask that all new offense is presented in the first half of the debate (before summary)
• want you to have fun (if you make the debate fun for me too, ill give you rly high speaks...im so serious give me some fun arguments please please please) with the assumption that its actually a smart arg

as for ld, i evaluate trad rounds the same as pf; for progressive rounds, im mildly familiar with the common fws/ts/ks and ill try my best to follow but you should probably try to treat me as a lay judge oops

I am a parent judge, so please refrain from spreading too much. Thank you!