add me to the email chain: labburi@bluevalleyk12.net

she/her

blue valley west '26

hey y'all I really don't mind what y'all run as long as your having fun. debate is a game, so play by the rules. with that being said ethos is very important and it is very important that everybody is respectful during the round. good luck!

she/her, bvw 26'

email: meha.0820b@gmail.com

smile and have fun :)

Barve.Rishabh@gmail.com

BVW Debate + OO

He/Him/His

Overall be awesome and have fun! I'm here to judge to help you get better, and I'm also learning myself!

***

CP:Run them and make them creative (ie, multiple planks, CP theory, all good with me).

DA:Run them!

Topicality:Not a big T-debater. I default to competing interpretations, tell me why your definition matters and prove in round abuse and I'll vote on it.

Theory:Just please don't be sneaky and hide ASPEC at the bottom of your T-Shell.

Ks: Prove to me a specific link and explain the K (I'm not hugely familiar with kritikal literature but I'm open to hearing them) and why the aff uniquely worsens it.

Speed:I'm fine with speed, slow down on analytics and SIGNPOST >>>.

"General cranky stuff"

- Your default to not knowing how to answer an argument should not be "THEY DROPPED IT!"

- That being said, DON'T DROP STUFF/don't completely drop case. Debate case!!!

At the end of the round tell me who won on what impacts/for what reasons. :)

• Have fun, any questions, just ask!

add me to the email chain: nchimpula@gmail.com & nchimpula@bluevalleyk12.net

she/her

blue valley west '26

hey y'all I really don't mind what y'all run as long as your having fun. debate is a game, so play by the rules. with that being said ethos is very important and it is very important that everybody is respectful during the round. good luck!

Paradigm

I’m currently a second-year debater and have been to a few tournaments. I haven’t judged much so keep it slow. Please explain all arguments, tell a story, and do overviews (explain overall arguments), and if you can without running out of time, under-views (explain cards). Flow the debate (maybe share a flow with your partner to help)! It’ll help you organize and clash with the opposing team's arguments, and help you a lot in rebuttals (which should be mainly off of flow) to recognize what arguments you’ve made, what they’ve made against it (or if they’ve dropped arguments).

I like to do speechdrop.net, but my email for an email chain is TFatimah@bluevalleyk12.net

I’ll take tech over truth. I’m trying to judge how well of a debater you are compared to whether or not you have the argument I agree with. You still need to explain and be convincing though.

5. Any general advice for the debaters

1. Be kind and friendly with the other team, and be respectful and professional. Don’t be harsh, racist, or prideful.

2. Give a roadmap for every speech.

3. Make your speech readable when you speech drop/email it.

4. Don’t cheat by stealing prep time or cutting cards. Time your speeches. For prep time, sometimes people steal prep accidentally, so for reference, whenever a timer is not running you can’t prep. So no talking to your partner, typing things up, etc between speeches when the other team or you are sending your speech.

5. Again, Flow.

6. Make eye contact when reading, don’t just read off, be fun and tell a story with your voice! Emphasize certain words when speaking, speak boldly, and when debating you should be acting a bit.

1. Topicality

For me to vote on it, make it convincing that the aff violates topicality. do it with teams you actually believe are not topical. Be sure to have all parts of the T ( definition, violation, standards, voter). Topicality is an a priori issue, so aff team, don’t drop it or it’s an automatic win to the negative.

2. Counterplans

Have a plan text. Make sure it’s competitive with the negative team. Explain it, explain the net benefit Just a tip for the aff, you should run perms with the counterplan.

3. Disadvantages

Please run a CP with the DA. like all arguments I’ve mentioned before, explain it and its connection to the aff, and its impact of course.

4. Kritiks

Explain them really well, help everyone in the round understand what it is and explain how they apply to the aff specifically.

Kinda Updated 4/9/2022

Krrish Madduru

TL-DR

I am currently attending Blue Valley West and graduating in 2025. Do not make racist, sexist, xenophobic, etc comments or I will reject the team immediately. Make comfortable arguments that you like during the debate round. There should be debates that have more warranted arguments and I am tech > truth. I will vote for any argument and are open to them including Spark.

email- KrrishMadduru@gmail.com

Speechdrop, email chain, or file share is fine as long as I have the speech doc

Speed is fine, be clear though. If you aren't clear I will say it once or twice before I tank speaker points.

Case

The case debate is very underrated and truly decides whether or not I vote aff or neg. Great case debate is where you win 80% of your rounds, I probably think. 2ACs should extend and defend their 1AC; I can vote either way on the Case debate. Having a great case debate will mean I have a higher probability of voting for whatever team does more work.

Case Turns are great and I do believe that they are very underrated and sometimes are better than just regular disadvantages.

Theory

I love theory arguments and if you give me a good enough reason to reject the team I will. Normally if it's just reading blocks back and forth I'll most likely reject the argument and move on to other parts of the debate. I do believe Conditionality is a voting issue and will vote for the aff if they can explain it well enough and prove that the neg has no reasons why condo is good and not abusive. The impact debate for theory is where I position myself in these types of arguments usually.

Topicality

If the affirmative team drops T, I will assume that the negative team has won. Only if the topicality argument is Article 5; which in case of this arg I won't vote for it since it doesn't have an interp(Fukuyama doesn't count).

Topicality is the same thing as theory and if it is just reading blocks and not explaining why I should vote for T or how the aff violates the resolution I will usually disregard the argument.

Always read a counter interp on Topicality if you're the aff or most likely you're going to lose on T only if the T doesn't relate to the affirmative team's plan I will usually disregard T.

DA

I treat disadvantages such as if the affirmative team could give one reason why the Disad is a bad idea I would vote affirmative on that flow.

It is most important to not drop the impacts of a disadvantage as that can show who won the debate round.

I like DA turns case arguments.

I also like debate rounds about framing such as impact calc and why the disadvantage outweighs the advantages.

Link turns should be used correctly and should tell a story. If there is offense for the aff on the flow, I would only count it as offense if the affirmative team extends the argument and tells me why it is offense for them.

FLOW

I love the UQ overwhelms the Link arguments and thumpers.

Prove to me why the impact outweighs or if there's a 1% risk of the net benefit; why should I vote neg. Don't make me evaluate that for myself.

CP

If the affirmative team wins on the disadvantage/net-ben then I will disregard the counterplan.

Also please change the plan text on counterplans so that it includes the aff's plan. For example if the affirmative runs A5 and you give a CP Text on Biotech; all the aff needs to do is say that it has nothing to do with the aff and can't solve for the aff.

There should be plan text for the counterplan and if the affirmative brings up an arg that says that there is no plan text, I will immediately reject the arg and possibly the team.

Counterplans need to be textually and functionally competitive and net beneficial or else I will just reject the arg or go for the perm.

Whoever has better quality of evidence on the Cp flow usually wins it if it's more specific or recent. Usually CP's won't have a solvency advocate that's specific enough so make sure you have one.

Kritiks

I am familiar(most familiar with set col, cap, imperialism) with some of the kritiks, but they should be explained well for me to vote on them. I will treat kritiks as any other argument. I can vote for Kritiks even if there is no alt or the affirmative wins the alternative. I usually run K's a lot and have a good understanding on lit. Framework debates should be fun and the aff should go for these framework debates because they are usually undercovered in the neg block.

K-Aff

For K-Aff's; if you prove that the aff is cheating and the aff concedes that or the role of the ballot arg; I automatically vote neg.

Presumption is often underutilized and can easily win neg rounds as well.

Aff if you are trying to go for a K-Aff, know your k-lit and what you're talking about. There should be a call or warrant to the ballot or otherwise I would vote neg.

I usually would vote for Switch Side Debate on T-USFG, but I can also vote for other standards and procedural fairness> Structural fairness. I invite ceiling v floor arguments on T-USFG also.

If you've made it here I will give an extra 0.2 speaker points or rankings depending on the tourney if you call the other team's speech goofy in your speech.

On Cap K, don't have the wrong link on Cap; remember the aff doesn't use nato meaning the link should be nothing to do with how NATO is capitalist.

Novices

Have fun! Usually, for novice debates I tend to be more easygoing. make some crazy arguments if you want to. Debate is supposed to be fun at the end of the day and is a game to understand and learn from for future experiences in your life. Take this activity wholeheartedly and use this time to get good at debate. Also, ask questions I'm always here to help after the debate round.

Senior at BVW

I prefer Speechdrop (cringe ik), but you can add me to the email chain nashyosman@gmail.com

-Don't be rude, you will lose speaks for this, if it gets bad I will let you know

-tech>truth, as long as tech has warrant and impact

- I strongly believe the judge needs to adapt to the round, not the other way around(see what I did there :D), so run whatever you want as long as it's within reason.

- Im not gonna default to judge kick unless told

- IMPACT CALC is good

- If you are a novice, focus on the basics, keeping the debate simple is probably your best chance of winning the round.

-Don't steal prep

-Don't abuse speed, especially in novice/lay rounds

- I can handle speed(hopefully), if I can't understand you while spreading I will say clear

-If you have any questions before the round ask me, if I am allowed to give feedback post-round I will give it if you ask me to. If not, then just email me and I will try to respond.

-Have fun, don't stress(you can be competitive and serious without stressing)

-I like jokes, + speaker points if you reference games or sports

CASE-

-Extend args with a claim and warrant

-Explaining your impacts is important.

-I number my args on the flow

-I heavily prioritize clash in these rounds actually responding to the other team's arguments and proving them wrong while proving why you are right are two things that are essential to case debate.

KRITIK-

-Experience with the basic K's(set col, cap, security, cyber) and a little neolib.

-K's are only getting more popular, even in novice, explain the K clearly to win.

-Framework would be nice if you are a novice, this is basically just telling the judge how to evaluate the K and the impacts.

-I think you need a general link to the aff on the K in order to win, whether the link is specific or not only matters as much as it you tell me it does but please have a link.

K-AFF

I would advise against this kind of argument if you are a novice. If not, TVA is key vs FW, and you need to explain how voting aff will solve your impacts.

DA-

- Weighing impacts is key to win, defend your impacts while providing offense on the other team's impacts.

- Link/Impact turns are underrated

CP-

-Have a plan text

-Have a solvency mechanism

T

-I default to comparing interps.

-These debates are hard to judge so being really specific and using examples( I like examples about what the world would look like without X or what debate would look like with X and what would happen as a result

Theory-

-I will only reject the arg if you win a Theory arg but if you are doing Condo on aff, this is a reason to reject the team.

-If you want to do theory args in the rebuttals, you have to be able to explain your arguments well.

-

Some general things to keep in mind

Don't steal prep and time your prep honestly

Speak only as fast as you can while still enunciating each work properly

Don't be rude to the people around you

If you cut cards then send a marked copy or I will vote you down for clipping

CP

There should be plan text for the counterplan and if the affirmative brings up an arg that says that there is no plan text, I will immediately reject the arg and possibly the team.

Counterplans need to be textually and functionally competitive.

Make sure you do a good job explaining the net benefit of the counterplan.

DA

Make sure that if you are running a DA, it actually links to the AFF.

I prefer DAs with solid specific links but general links are fine too if explained well.

K

If you are reading a K, then it should be explained very well for me to vote on them.

Make sure you explain the parts and why it matters in relation to the AFF.

Impact Calc

Do good impact calc during rebuttals

I prefer Probability>Timeframe>Magnitude

Topicality

If you are using Topicality then make sure that it is justified within the round.

Theory

I think theory arguments are great. Just don't read blocks of text back and forth and explain them well. I prefer Education arguments.

Novices

Have fun! Debate is supposed to be fun at the end of the day and is a game to understand and learn from for future experiences in your life. Take this activity wholeheartedly and use this time to get good at debate. Also, ask questions I'm always here to help after the debate round.

bvw 24

aryashah0916@gmail.com

Arnesh Sharma (he/him):

BVW '25

BVW SV

Email chain - arneshsharmadebate@gmail.com

Tech > truth, truth is the tiebreaker if both teams have equally debated the technical portions.

I run mostly critical arguments, but do what you do.

TLDR: debate how you debate, fine with speed but clarity matters more, I'm open to anything*, clash is good, 2NR/2AR impact framing is key, and an argument is only an argument if it has at least a claim and a warrant

Don't be mean -- racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. = L + low speaks

Good joke about Arya Vasudevan = boosted speaks

Disclosure (1AC and past 2NRs) should occur pre-round

Some people I look up to: Nargis Suleman, Saketh Pradhan, Nish Neelakandan, Azja Butler, Shaurir Ramanujan, Zakariya Ahmed, Kyle Toal

*Please don't run death good in front of me

Case:

Very cool. Case debate is highly underrated as it tends to generate solid clash, so have fun with it.

T:

Ehh. T is fine, I'm probably not the best judge for a super techy T debate -- have a clear interp and standards, I default to competing interps best. Don't let my lack of T debates get in your way though, just explain it a little more clearly than you would to most judges and you're fine.

DA:

Cool. Specific links are great, generic links are fine, "DA outweighs and turns case" needs uniqueness to be an offensive argument, do impact calc (novices: compare the timeframe, probability, and magnitude of your impacts v. your opponents' impacts), "no risk" exists on both sides. The more you frame the impacts, the less I have to decipher them myself.

CP:

Cool. CPs need to be competitive and I prefer that it competes over the plan's mechanism. Sufficiency framing is important, and having specific solvency advocates is also key. Cheaty CPs do exist, but I'll listen to anything. I lean aff on CP theory, but still need clear explanations -- condo is good, but I'll still evaluate condo 2ARs technically and be very upset while doing so.

K:

Cool. I've mostly ran set col, imperialism, and racial cap, but regardless of what you run, contextualize the kritik and explain links thoroughly. Links need to be something that implicates the plan, but not necessarily unique. Call out 1AC authors and lines from their evidence. You should probably have an alt that can solve the links, and if you don't go for it, explain why you still win. I default to weighing the aff. Overviews are often too long and can many times be substituted with appropriate work on the line-by-line -- I'm not going to put arguments embedded in the overview onto the LBL for you. Although not necessary, knowing your literature base (especially if it's a K you have run/plan on running for a long time) is helpful and highly educational.

K-Affs:

Cool. Explain your relation to the topic and the ballot. Go for the impact turn or the we meet, idrc. If your 1AC involves a performance of any kind, it should probably have some relevance throughout the debate instead of just the first eight minutes of the round. "I shouldn't be left feeling that the performative aspects of the strategy were useless/disjointed from debate and your chosen literature base." (Azja Butler)

Most importantly, have fun, don't take the round too seriously, and reach out if you have any questions for me.

bvw '25

for email chains: Iman.suleman1011@gmail.com

remember novice debate is for learning and having fun!

Gonna make this short and simple

I don't have a preference for what you choose to run. But please make sure that you understand what you are arguing and can contextualize it in a way that is easy to understand. I prefer you speak slower but you can spread if necessary.

Quality of Arguments > Quantity of Arguments

Remember that debate is also about persuasion. Reading a bunch of cards with no context and overviews will make it harder to win the ballot.

Blue Valley West '24

he/him

email chain - hienjoshuatran@gmail.com

If you make the debate about the Race War you get +.3 speaks, and if you shout out Aarnav Pemmasani you get +.2 speaks.

add me to the email chain: avasudevan270@gmail.com

bvw '25

she/her

bluevalleywestbw@gmail.com