Last changed on
Wed May 29, 2024 at 1:30 AM EDT
Updated on May 29 for TOC Shenzhen:
1. Name: Miaomiao
2. Judging experience: e. I have judged Public Forum debate for more than a year.
3. Experience in debate: d. I have debated Public Forum for more than a year.
4. What is your speaking speed preference? d. Fast speed (200+wpm)
5. How much do you know about the topic? e. I have very little background knowledge about the topic. Please make sure I understand any topic-specific ideas or language you use.
6. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)? b. No, the second speaker rebuttal is only responsible for answering the first constructive.
7. How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes? a. It’s very important. I take lots of notes and make my decision based almost entirely based on my notes.
8. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?: Technicality.
9. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?
If I look mad, I am not. I'm just thinking about your arguments. My facial expressions are only important when I look confused, which means you should elaborate on your point.
This is my old PF paradigm if you are still reading:
Stylistic Preference:
- For any argument or evidence you want me to evaluate, extend it in BOTH summary and final focus
- Summary is the LAST speech in which you can provide new evidence
- If you run a spread case, explain it well in crossfires and later speeches
- Case-disclosure: mutual or not at all
- Kritik: don't run it unless you know what you are talking about
- Do NOT run plans or counterplans in PF
- Frontlining during the second rebuttal is NOT mandatory
Speed:
- Please DO NOT sacrifice clarity for speed; it will be sad if I don't catch what you said :(
- Less than 200 words per minute would be nice for a constructive speech
- I would really appreciategradually speeding up because I can adapt to your voice andenunciation better this way
Evidence-checking:
- Provide a valid link and the specific quote you used
- Address it in the next speech after checking
- Try NOT to check more than 5 pieces at a time (of course, you get to check more than once)
Crossfire:
- I'm ok with being aggressive, but the condition is to be productive (see my facial expression for reference)
- I DO NOT flow crossfire: anything that isn't covered in the upcoming speech doesn't go on the flow
Things that would INCREASE your speaker points (in order of importance):
- EXPLAINING WARRANTS
- Providing well-cut cards
- Straight turns (non-unique, no link, link turn)
- Strategically collapsing
- Executing a weird argument well
- Incorporating theory-resembling arguments
Things that might REDUCE your speaker points(in order of importance):
- Strawpersoning (in particular, saying that your opponents have no evidence when they do)
- Calling for loads of cards but not addressing - ask for case disclosure in advance if you want cards so badly
- Accusing your opponent of not frontlining in the second rebuttal after reading what I wrote in the last bullet point under "Stylistic Preference" (kind-smile.jpg)
- Having off-time roadmaps longer than 10 seconds
- Exceeding a 5-second grant for each speech/cf
CX Paradigm
MSU ’26
Debated pf for 2 years during high school (China & US circuits), 2nd year doing policy debate (2a)
Please add me to the chain: zmmdb8@gmail.com
Pronouns: she/her/hers
- Zero tolerance for anything ethically or morally horrible (racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, death good, any form of discrimination or harmful rhetoric, etc. directly lost you the debate)
- As an ESL I appreciate clarity over speed, go slightly slower on analytics please
- Extra speaks for pronouncing last names of Chinese authors correctly