Hello, my name is Mahek Bhakta. My background in debate encompasses four years of competing in Lincoln-Douglas debate with Belleville West High School, followed by two years of experience as a judge.

Regarding speed, I am open to debaters choosing their preferred pace, provided they clearly articulate their framework and contentions.

Lincoln-Douglas debate is inherently structured to be evaluated within a framework, thus I place value on debaters thoroughly elaborate on and justify the significance of their chosen value and value criterion.

During rebuttals, I expect direct refutations of the opponent's framework and contentions. It is advisable for debaters to extend their arguments, elaborating on their or giving impacts.

I do place a considerable emphasis on the delivery of voting issues at the conclusion of the debate.

Debaters do not have to worry about feeling uncomfortable utilizing debate terminology, as I am familiar with terms including, but not limited to, cross apply, extend, and fiat.

To win in a debate round, it is not mandatory for a debater to win on the framework alone; rather, they must demonstrate the relevance of their framework within the context of their case.

I believe in the necessity of incorporating both analytical and empirical evidence. The capacity to effectively present both analytical and philosophical evidence is fundamental to debate.

Hi! I am a fourth-year debater. Over my four years, I've competed in PF, LD, and Congress, although I have the most experience in PF and Congress.

As a judge, I have a few (a lot of) notes:

(TLDR: Be respectful and create clash)

1. Speed is okay, but if you're going to try to spread, you have to speak clearly and enunciate.
2. Please create clash! Responding to your opponent’s arguments is what makes debate a debate!
3. I shouldn't need a roadmap if you organize your speeches in a way that makes sense, but if you want to give one, go for it.
4. You can time yourself, but I will also time you.
5. I will not flow cross (But I will take off speaker points if a debater is being disrespectful during it). So if you want something said in cross to be considered, you have to bring it up in a speech.
6. I appreciate a unique argument! (Just be sure that your point is important and has evidence)
7. Remember to cite your sources in your speeches. I can't give you a win based purely on "logic."
8. Make sure to focus on what you think are the most important issues in the round. Collapsing, especially during summary and FF, makes it easier to convince me to vote for you on the issues that matter. Don't spend time going down unnecessary rabbit holes!
9. Please be polite and respectful to your partner and opponents.
10. Any type of bigotry (sexism, racism, homophobia, etc.) is unacceptable. It can and will lose you the round.

I believe that debate is an educational thing. Do not just read cards; analyze them and show me how they connect. I like to see a lot of impact weighing. I am also good with speed. For Lincoln Douglas, make sure you carry your value and vc through the round and show me how your case upholds them.

New: I'm Aurelia Montgomery, a judge coming with Belleville West. I've been judging for two years, exclusively in the Illinois circuit. I have no problem with speed of delivery. VC is very important to me. I have no specific expectations of formatting. I really like voter's issues (please do them!!!) but I can make a decision without them. Please extend arguments. In the case of argument vs style, argument will trump every single time. I don't have a preference on framework. Yes, there does need to be at least baseline evidence, although rhetoric is appreciated.

Old: Very heavy on framework (debate content is important, as are etiquette and following courtesy norms), it is the most heavily weighted factor in my judging philosophy. Cases and rebuttals still have to be factually correct, but the philosophical basis is more salient.

I expect debaters to be kind to each other, debate is a friendly practice in polite argument, not an opportunity to be rude to your opponent. This also ties into etiquette, points can (and will, depending on context) be lost if the debater doesn't follow courtesy norms (biggest ones being standing/facing the judge when talking, and ensuring everyone is ready/letting the judge know when you start). Going over on time is part of these norms, and points could be taken off depending on severity and reoccurrence.

But again, decisions rely almost entirely on framework, excluding extremely inappropriate conduct and flawed (ie fabricated or clearly misapplied) evidence. That also includes opinion that is presented as evidence.

Background: I participated in a debate during college. The events that I participated in were parliamentary debate and Lincoln-Douglass. I have judged LD at a high school and college level. I am an attorney now. My undergrad was in political science.

Debate Preference: I value all styles of debate and will evaluate whatever debate is had in front of me.

If you want to have a value debate, please specify not only your value but also how it is different than your opponent's value. All too much, the values offered can be very similar, and a lot of time is wasted on this area of the debate because no one is differentiating enough to make it a voter issue for one side over the other.

My preferred style of debate will center around impacts and impact weighing. I want clear links to the impacts given, not nebulous impacts that have little to do with debate. This does not mean that the impacts cannot be large, but I want clear link stories to how they evolve into that larger impact.

I also want to see lots of clashes between the arguments. You bring a whole argument with you to the debate. Do not lose it just because your opponent said something else. I want to see the development of your case from your first speech to your last this includes extending arguments from one speech to another explicitly.

When citing cards, make sure that your citation is clearly stated for both myself and your opponent to hear.

At the end of the debate, I want to do as little work as possible to get to a decision. This means that I need everyone to make the arguments in the right places on the flow. If your opponent asks you to slow down, please do your best to accommodate without compromising your speech.

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me.

Hello (If you don't read this, just remember IMPACTS IMPACTS IMPACTS and I will give a large verbal RFD at the end)!

My name is Alex Redell, I both coach and judge for Normal, IL University High School's Debate Team.

In high school, I did 3 years of public forum debate. After high school I've judged and coached a multitude of tournaments in both PF and LD. I'm going to be a junior in university, so with all that in mind, I'd like to think that all my debate knowledge is still fresh within my mind.

Since I help coach University, I'll be pretty well up to date on all the cards, evidence, lingo, and other stuff for each topic, so if you run something that is a stretch, misinterpretation, or misrepresentation, I will most likely be aware. HOWEVER, I judge debates on the flow. If something flows through every speech and your opponent doesn't call you out on it, even if the argument itself is flawed, I will still vote it through if the opponent never calls it out and you weigh it properly. The only exception to that is if you blatantly lie about evidence and I catch it (then I won't flow it through).

Other than that, I should be a normal Illinois circuit judge. For opening constructive, I'm fine with speed up to a certain point. I won't welcome all out spreading, but reading fast but legibly has never been an issue for my flowing skill. I'm rather standoffish regarding your rebuttal, summary, and final focus style. Whatever format you are comfortable with is the format I will be comfortable with, the only necessities of these speeches are to: A. Flow through your points from speech to speech (if you don't flow an argument through, I won't weigh it). B. weigh your impacts big time in summary (this means quantify it if possible, compare/contrast your impacts with your opponents, and emphasize its importance). and C. cover the spread of information (if you slip up and forget to respond to something in a speech and your opponent flows this through all of their speeches, I have to prefer your opponent since they flowed your lack of response through). I also have no issue with collapsing onto a specific argument/point in summary, but if you do this make sure it was necessary. Too many times recently I've seen teams collapse either on the wrong argument or collapse when they didn't need to and it has hurt their chances of winning, so be wary of that. I also don't flow anything from cross, so if you wish something from cross to be flowed through, you must bring it up in your next speech.

Lastly, just please have fun. PF debate can be tons of fun, and I don't want any competitors to ever forget that. This means be nice to each other, ask questions after the round to me if you have them, and stay positive! If there is anything you take away from this paradigm it is the previous statement. After every round I will always give feedback to all four speakers and to all arguments in the round. I like to do this so I can explain to you any decision I made so you don't walk away confused, and if you need to make changes before future rounds, you will be able to. If I am allowed to disclose, I 100% will, so I can explain how in a future debate the loser can capture the ballot next time (I won't disclose for novices though).

My paradigm is not very strict.

This is because this is your event as a student. You are convincing me of your case and I believe the freedom in how you do that is helping you think more critically. This is supposed to be fun, so have fun! So don't be afraid of arguments that aren't normal. I am much more likely to vote for someone who thinks outside the box than someone who has the same case as everyone else.

That said if you take too much ground in a debate and the opponent points out an unfair framework that heavily has an impact on my decision.

Name: Dave Van Zummeren

School Affiliation: Belleville West High School (Assistant Coach)

Were you previously affiliated with any other school? NONE

Number of years judging:1^st year

Have you judged in other debate events?

I judge tournaments when we are short on judges. I usually judge novice LD.

Speed of delivery preference (slow, conversational, brisk conversational, etc.)

I prefer speakers to be clear even if they are a bit slower. It is important to me that speakers clearly state their contentions and value.

How important is the value criterion in making your decision?

As long as the speaker can relate the case to their value criterion that is what I am looking for.

Do you have any specific expectations for the format of the 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal and 2 Negative Rebuttal (i.e. line by line/ direct refutation and/or big picture?)

In this I like the big picture approach.

Are voting issues necessary for your decision?

They are not necessary in my decision however, I do think they can help strengthen a case.

How critical are ”extensions” of arguments into later speeches- somewhat critical.

Flowing/note-taking-

This is a big thing! I look for speakers to attack what the opponent said.

Do you value argument over style? Style over argument? Argument and style equally?

I value argument over style.

In order to win a debate round, does the debater need to win their framework or can they win using their opponent’s framework?

They can win with using their opponent’s framework. As long as the debater can prove their argument is the better option than their opponents.

How necessary do you feel the use of evidence (analytical and/or empirical) is in the round?

Evidence is important. You must be able to back up your thoughts and assumptions with evidence in order to win the round.

Any other relevant information:

I currently teach Social Studies at Belleville West High School and this is my 2nd year as the assistant debate coach at Belleville West

General Thoughts

1. I appreciate students who are organized and can prove they have prepared for their topics .

2. Showing confidence in your arguments, proves you are well prepared.

3. I don't have any particular expectations about the rate of delivery - faster, slower, etc. is fine. Delivery is an important skill but I am more concerned about completing your work and your preparation.

4. Mistakes happen, I do not mind mistakes, but I appreciate aggressive mistakes! Keep going even if you make a mistake, everyone will!

5. The crossfire is an extremely important part of the debate. Please keep this in mind and make sure to attack specific points your opponent is making.

Best of luck to you

I look forward to judging you.

Dave Van Zummeren