Hi! I'm a student judge and have competed in Extemporaneous, Impromptu, Duo Interpretation, and Parliamentary Debate.

Speech:

• Know that I have cried watching interp events before and I would love for someone to make me do that again so I can test out my new mascara combo
• There is no rush! Try to stay calm, change your speed when it calls for it but talk at a good speed appropriate for your piece.
• Please speak in a reasonable tone, unless your piece calls for yelling there is no reason to scream your head off. Same with the flip side, try to speak loud enough and really enunciate
• PROJECT YOUR VOICE! Rooms are usually silent. Let's not make it awkward, fill this space up with your piece and really try to make people feel
• For my impromptu and extemp queens, if you're out of things to say about your topic, end your speech. Running around in circles and saying "um, ah, oh" will not do you any good or raise your rank any higher. Quality over quantity.
• Extempers! For novices, I'll be looking for at least 2 CITED quotes/statistics to support your speeches. The more the better!

Debate:

• As a debater myself, I'm familiar with the fast-paced rounds and illegible flows however, as I know that confusion is bound to happen, using voters and incorporating impact calc would be highly encouraged. I can do fast talking but to guarantee I fully understand, please try to include impact calc.
• If you're going to use facts or pull a Critik or CP or a K or anything along those lines, make it make sense. I should be able to fully understand why you used it.
• Please don't drop arguments. Even if your rebuttal isn't the most thought out and sounds insane, do your best to bring a refutation.
• I'm pretty chill but know that my comments will be pretty in detail. If you have questions about my comments, what I mean, or why I chose the side I did, my email is aguonk@nclack.org if you want to learn more.
• Don't ask for an off-time roadmap if your speech isn't going to go over the time limit, trust me it gets old quickly
• Debates must be polite. You may attack your opponent's CASES, but no ad hominem shall be permitted, any type of discriminatory behavior will result in getting dropped. Laughing, rude language, eye-rolling, interrupting speeches, pointing, and making faces are all things you will refrain from doing or I'll deduct your speaker points.

Remember, learning and expanding your knowledge is the essence of speech and debate. Let's all learn something today and have fun!

I have quite a bit of experience in debate (a couple years of high school and one in middle school), and have mainly done public forum debate. In a debate round I judge based off of your ability to both create strong arguments, and refute your opponent's case. I appreciate it when you tie your contentions and your refutations back to the weighing mechanism throughout the debate, especially at the end. In speech rounds structure is really important, along with signposting. If you are doing impromptu I really want to see your three main points, and in all forms of speech and debate I need to know what you are talking about. Pace and body language are also really important for speaker points. Most importantly, be nice! I will mark you down speaker points if you are rude to me or any of your opponents. And finally, make sure to have fun!

Hi! I've done parliamentary debate, public forum, interp speeches and platform speeches. I love creative arguments, extensive linkchains, and strong impacts. What this means is, while debating, don't just tell me that one small bad thing is going to happen. What are the consequences of that bad thing, and what new harms do these consequences cause?

I will do very little work for you on the flow, so when making refutations, please state explicitly which of your opponent's statements you are responding to, and please bring up when the other side drops points if you want your impacts to flow through.

Keep it chill and goofy in-round, don't attack your opponent, just their ideas.

Hello!

I'm a four-year high school debater, so I have a decent amount of experience between events. Please keep rounds respectful and positive. If you want time signals, I'll be happy to give them to you, I'll be timing all rounds anyway. I'll also be flowing and taking notes in all rounds. If that's distracting, please let me know before the round.

I understand this is a novice debate tournament, so if you have any questions regarding timing, my paradigms, or general etiquette please feel free to ask.

I'll mainly be judging all speech rounds around entertainment/informative value and the following of the rules regarding the event.

For debate, I'll be judging based on the information you give me, and your ability to contest your opponent's case. I encourage world-building and observations, along with off-time road maps. While I don't encourage spreading, if you and your opponent allow it, I'll accept it.

Lastly, I don't tolerate any hate speech or disrespect in rounds. If you engage in hateful/disrespectful speech or activity, I will stop flowing and/or taking notes. Please be respectful to your opponent, and if you have certain pronouns you would like to express in order to make yourself comfortable, please do so.

I look forward to judging you!

Bailey Brown

I'm new to judging, but I've competed in LD, Parli, and PF before (mostly Parli). I judge on impacts—impact calc PLEASE!! Having a well-structured speech that is easy to follow would also be great.

Other notes:

• Fast talking is fine, but don't spread. I don't care if you're LD or Policy, I listen to podcasts on 1.75x speed and I still can't understand spreading. Just don't do it. If I can't understand you, it's not going on my flow.
• Don't bring up new points in voters please. I won't flow them.
• Don't be a bigot. Pretty self-explanatory. Watch your language—I don't really care about curse words but if you say racial epithets or something targeted just know that I will vote you down.
• Just be kind to others. Don't roll your eyes at your opponent. We all start the debate on equal ground.

About me:

- I am what you considered a mom judge

- I have served as an officer in the Air force for 21 years and retired last year.

Want I like to see in debate overall:

- Speaking at a reasonable pace.

- Please sign post.

- Don't drop arguments

- Please do voters

- Confidence

- Be kind to each other.

What I like to see with speech events:

- Quality over quantity

- Have confidence and project your voice

- If you can apply your topic/theme to real world problems that would be great as it gives a reason why people should care about your theme/topic.

I've been a debate competitor for four years and have competed in Parli, LD, and BQD(in which I was a national octofinalist at the 2023 TOC-I'll see you in Des Moines!).

Speech kids, I'm going to be honest in saying I don't know anything about it and will pretty much only judge you based on how pretty you speak. Sorry.

Debate Kids: Ok, now that the speech kids are gone, here are some things I like/preferences:

1) I love a good value debate. As a long-time LD competitor having a good value and value criteria or weighing mechanism to support your case and weigh your impacts is very important to me. I won't cast a ballot solely based upon who won the value/weighing mechanism debate or concerning that of an opponent, but how you supported a value and tied it back into the scope of your case with play a significant role in my decision.

2) Tech over truth, and flow wins the round. This is where I would tell you that I'm a tabula rasa judge, but unfortunately I'm well aware that true tabula rasa judges don't exist. If it helps, you can fit me in the category of a game theorist judge, and therefore your only goal in this round is to win, no matter the means or the argument-but also keep the point on respect below in mind. I don't care how crazy your argument is, just support it well. Flow wins the round, but keep in mind, quality over quantity.

3)Speed is fine, but don't overdo it. I can handle speed(and am even guilty of spreading some cp's in the past), but my tolerance comes with some basic limitations, such as slowing down on your taglines, sharing your case so I can read along if you're going at or over 350 wpm, and NOT SPREADING IF YOUR OPPONENT SAYS THEY DONT WANT YOU TO, AND STOPPING IF I OR YOUR OPPONENT CALLS CLEAR. If you do not respect your opponent's preferences or continue to spread after someone calls clear I will stop flowing, drop your speaks, and potentially drop you. :)

4)I am fine with K's/Theory, but make it make sense. If I am your judge, you have been given the right to run Kritiks, discuss the role of the ballot, run theory, CP's, texhinical/rules of debate args, and other arguments that could potentially be seen as nontopical or nonsensical to other (lay) judges. I do enjoy creative resolution interpretations(see point on framing below). With this said, keep in mind that I do not have a degree in metaphysics, and assuming that I do could entail the majority of your case going over my head. It is your responsibility to explain your argument in a way that someone who hasn't been researching that branch of philosophy for the past two months can understand and weigh on the flow. If needed, I may ask to see your case or have you pull specific cards.

5) Don't drop the FW. Having a comprehensive framework compete with definitions, burdens, and a v+vc(see point one above)/wm will make your case stand out, but make sure to cross-apply it to that of your opponent as well as the rest of your case and your opponent's case. I abhor rounds in which both teams throw out a framework at the beginning of their constructive and then don't bring it up for the rest of the round. Even if you don't have a framework, make sure to, at the very least, address that of your opponent, otherwise it might automatically become the way I'll frame the round, and you definitely don't want to take those chances.

6) Impact calc and voters for the win. While it goes without saying that you should be pointing out impacts throughout the entirety of the round, I wholeheartedly believe that your final speech should not include any refutations and should be fully dedicated to voters, regardless of what bizarre claims your opponent made in their last speech. Furthermore, I love seeing impact calc complete with buzzwords like magnitude, timeframe, solvency, and reversibility(as long as you're being reasonable-not all impacts need to lead to extinction or nuclear war).

7) Be respectful and kind. Yet another point that should go without saying, please be respectful and kind. The best debaters, in my opinion, know how to assert themselves with confidence while simultaneously creating a safe, welcoming learning environment for all individuals present in the round. Treat your opponent with dignity, consideration, and respect, and don't ever try to mentally manipulate them for your own advantage. If you are experiencing harassment or discrimination on behalf of your opponent, I want to know so I can factor it into my decision(and potentially contact tournament officials on your behalf, depending on the severity of the situation). I understand that not all aggression occurs at the surface level/in-round or is automatically apparent to me. I understand that there are snakes out there who will switch up their behavior in my presence, but you should always feel safe to come and talk to me. Furthermore, I will drop you for intolerance(racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ethnocentrism, etc.). If you have to ask yourself whether something is appropriate to say, you probably shouldn't be saying it.

For any other burning last-minute questions, feel free to ask me before the round.

If you have any post-round questions, are seeking any clarifications, or hope to see my flow, please email me at hokaw24976@loswego.k12.or.us

In general:

-I expect every person to make speech and debate accessible. I will dock speaker points if you are mean or rude to your competitors, judges, or audience. The whole purpose of speech and debate is to have a forum to respectfully debate our ideas, so please stay respectful.

For debate:

-Talking fast is ok with me, but if your opponent tells you to slow down, I expect you to do so.

-I am fairlytabula rasa(blank state), meaning that I will try not to take into account my outside knowledge on the round. If your opponent says something that isn't true, please tell me why it isn't in round.

-Roadmaps are appreciated.

Speeches:

For memorized speeches, please memorize them! However, I am completely fine with you taking quick breaks if you need to.

For interps: Please block your speeches, but not to the point where they distract me from the actual speech. Also, please enunciate.

I judge events based on the organization, persuasion, and speech articulation. As well as the emotional connection within speeches and the value of good sportsmanship. I have one year under my belt for speech and debate so I am looking for advanced techniques and respect from participants.

I am a communication judge. I like students to clearly communicate, give real-world examples and have clear clash. Structure and organization are very important and will help me flow the round. I don't like progressive LD. I don't enjoy a definition debate in any form of debate but I will vote on topicality. I want civility, persuasion, and a clash. I generally vote on stock issues in Policy and I am not a fan of K's.

Welcome to the wonderful page of the Renee!

For debate, the main things I look for is how well you back up your arguments with evidence. The evidence should support your central line of reasoning well and should be factually true and usually pretty recently dated, depending on your debate format. I can give more things I look for before round if need be. Also, be respectful to opponents :)

For unprepped speeches, I look for structure, creative plots/ideas/evidence, and good analysis of why your evidence connects to your points and why your topic matters. There should always be a main theme to your speech.

For prepped speeches, I look for a fluid, well-delivered speech that addresses interesting ideas. Usage of pauses, dramatic effect, facial expressions, tone, etc. are things that I typically look for.

Feel free to ask me any questions about these before/during round(not during a speech)! Please ask me if you have any doubts! I'm mostly a chill judge, but still am reasonable. Good luck to all of you!

Hello there! Welcome to Speech and Debate.

IE people, some of my general expectations are being friendly, kind, and wise. I do a lot of events so I know all the hardship you have to go through. I mainly do Poetry and HI now.

For my debate people, I’m pretty easy on most cases, make sure to be clear about it. I will be a tabula rasa, a blank slate, thus whatever you say goes unless refuted, so please don’t drop a point, or two. Also, I would recommend doing signposting as organization is key, just simply state what you’re refuting and then refute it, it would make it so much easier for both me and your opponents.

Policy! Yay, I love to see you guys, fellow policy kid! Please start an email chain even if you're not spreading and add me to it at nguyenhai@nclack.org. I don't dislike any arguments in Policy: Kritiks, Theory, Topicality, Condo, Impact Mitigation, etc... are fine. Just explain it well.

Public forum! I'm a tech judge but do explain to me the topic in your first speech. To win my ballot, do impact weighing, and extend all the substance through. Do not just give counterarguments to all your opponents and not have any contentions. On spreading, the same goes for you, send a doc and if you're doing analytics have bullet points, in case I didn't catch it.

Lincoln-Douglas! I'm a flay judge. I'll able to keep up with the flow just not the jargon and strategies.

*All offensive language -racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc...- will not be condoned

**Mention or run biopolitics for some extra speaks

Have fun and don’t hesitate to ask for assistance!!

Yo, this is my second year of speech and debate. I qualified to state in Policy and Inform last year. That is my experience.

For speeches I value a voice that I can hear, dramatic pauses are great, and I want to hear emotion in your voice.

For Policy, I'm open to almost every argument. I tend to vote a lot on Kritiks. I don't particularly like Topicality unless it is extremely relevant. Disads, Counter Plans, On Case, K affs, and Framework.

Hello!

I am a newish judge, I competed in IE in high school and Congress in college in Illinois. So sometimes I have slightly different expectations than folks who have always been in debate in Oregon. This is my second year judging in Oregon. I am also a coach.

I try to encourage competitors to try their best to try to shape their arguments without attempting to tailor their arguments to an individual judge's paradigm. Particularly when you have several judges, it can be a challenge when their paradigms are not complementary. Nonetheless, a few general things for me

1. I try to choose the person I think won the debate. Simply because you counter or respond to an argument and say "this shouldn't flow" doesn't mean I have to agree that it doesn't flow.
2. I value organization greatly.
3. I do weigh arguments, some are more central than others, and winning on one argument is sometimes enough for me to make a decision. Winning on two smaller points is not as good as winning on the biggest point. In debate terms, I am weighing impact.
4. Stick to the resolution and the event you are in. Funding shouldn't be a key argument in LD or BQ, but it should be a central point in Policy/CX or PF. Additionally.... debate rules are not universal for all of the events. For instance... Public Forum does not have the "no no new arguments in final focus or summary" rule that exists in other styles of debate. It might be frowned on, but it isn't a DQ or anything.
5. No personal attacks. I strongly frown on inferred or direct insults. Yes "my opponent is not a good debater" is a personal attack.
6. I am generally open to people running Ks and Ts and other parts of the alphabet but I do not vote for them very often. My philosophy has always been that K's should be last resorts when neg or aff bias is unavoidable, not an excuse not to debate a resolution you don't think is cool.
7. An extension is not a new argument. Debaters on not confined to only repeating themselves in their final speech.
8. Saying "we don't have time to respond to that" is taking time to respond to it, especially if you repeat it a few times.
9. My flows/notes are often general and often messy. I am sorry, that is also just how I take notes and how I flow for myself.
10. Adding this one because I got a question about it... I will flow cross but I won't always flow like 'can you restate your 3rd sub-point" type stuff. If a question has an impact on the round or if I thought it was a good question, I will usually make a note at least.

I am fairly new to judging, but I have been competing in parliamentary debate and impromptu speaking for 2 years. I judge on flow---making sure to signpost and not drop points goes a long way. Also, be clear, use questions, and try not to be immoral. Believe in your arguments and don't talk too fast.

All Debates:

Feel free to time yourself but my time counts!

I don't mind "Off Time Road Maps."

Looking for good organization with clear concise ideas supporting what you are trying to convey.

In LD and Public Forum; I don't like speed, this is not a sprint is a marathon of information make me understand.

Courtesy to Opponent (includes abusive behavior or interrupting the other team let them finish statement n questioning). In Parli when talking to your partner during presentation do it quietly not to interrupt the speaker.

In Parii my expectations have risen due to the use of internet. I am expecting good quality work and quoting of sources will be a must to support your contentions.

"Pretend I am dumb as a rock and educate me!"

My paradigms are few and fairly simple. This is partially for your own information as well as a way I can remind myself when asked in round.

1. I am a seasoned veteran in the space with competitive experience at the high school and college level. Roughly 5 years in total. I have been a full time judge for almost twice as long. So you can understand that I am able to understand most arguments and positions one may choose to run in a given round. With that in mind certain position pertaining to theory or K shells I would rather not see in events outside CX. If a parli round does involve a Counter plan or a T sheet of some kind, I can roll with it as long as it is well explained and reasonably fits in the scope of the resolution.

2. Given my experience you may think that I can keep up with speed. Mind you I can but it is not something I particularly care for. What I like to hear is well thought out and warranted points that best describe your position. I'd much rather see 2 fleshed out contentions rather than 5 blippy ones you hope to out-spread your opponents on. Along side this if (Pertaining to everything not Parli) if you have a card and you read it, explain what you just read or how it connects to the overall thesis of the contention/argument. Don't just read a study or a statistic and expect the judge to do the work for you.

3. In cases where a definition or the value criterion/weighing mechanism is a point of clash, I want to see good argumentation explaining why I need to prefer your side over the other. DO NOT assert that you are in the right for one shallow reason or another. Explain why the debate should be looked the lens you believe it should. On the same page, if you have a value you want considered, try to tie your case back to it. IE, when explaining the impacts of the case show or reference it is the more utilitarian or more just impact. You get the idea.

4. -LD can disregard- I believe partner-style debate to be exactly that, a partner/team sport. So if you wish to confer with your partner at any time at all during the course of the debate, fine. I encourage it. That being said, please be advised I only flow and focus on the words coming out of the currently timed speaker's mouth. Meaning if your partner says something to you or helps you answer a question during cross that is fine, but if the speaker does not audible say it, I will not care and likely disregard the comment. Therefore, make sure you and your partner are communicating effectively to make sure all cases notes are properly presented.

5. When is comes to question and answer periods (cross examination or questions in parli) REFRAIN from making any argumentative statements/questions. Any and all questions should be purely clerical in nature. Meaning, please limit your question to matters pertaining to explanation of statements made by the opposing side. If you want to ask about mechanics of a plan or to explain a point more, that is fine. Along the same line, please keep question periods civil. Do not step over your opponent until they have finished their answer. Lastly I do not flow during cross examination periods. If there was something brought up in those moments you want to be addressed, bring them to my attention during your time.

6. Simply put. BE. COURTEOUS. I cannot stress how much I despise overly hateful rhetoric, calling out the other team in a demeaning way, and just overall cockiness. Be kind, be conversational, be nice. No calling the other team racist, no blaming groups of people for current global crisises, no homophobia. Makes sense? It should.

7. -Parli only- With the dawn of internet prep I think it is more incumbent on the competitors to have some evidence. Now granted evidence does not win debates and I won't take a lack of evidence as a reason to prefer. That being said I expect more fleshed out contentions and hopefully a stronger debate. If you can provide evidence and leverage that as a voter cool. I really would like to hear at least one full citation from each side.

If you have anything more specific to ask in round, be my guest. I will answer straightforward and honestly.

hello I am jack solari curently in highschool. I primarely do LD debate but i also have run several speches such as di. I do have experentce with policy debate and such tackticks that come with it such as spreeding so if both partys agree i will alow it but if both sides dont pleas keep in mind you should not spreed. i enjoy a clear roadmap for my flow and clear links and impacts. you should be tellling me how to vote not asking me to vote in a certen way aslong as i can understand you I will flow what you say

most importantly any discrimination,hate speech and/or personal atackts to one of the other competitors will result in a loss.

hope its a great round - Jack Solari

PS Sorry for the misspelling. I have Dysgraphia also I hate capitalism don't bring it up unless you have to

a little bit about me:

-I go to Lakeridge High School, class of '25 and I use he/him pronouns. My main events are Lincoln-Douglas, impromptu, extemporaneous speaking. I have dabbled a bit in parli but am by no stretch of the imagination an expert. Feel free to email me before or after a round if you any questions at stuck26529@loswego.k12.or.us.

non-negotiables:

-I expect every person to make speech and debate an inclusive and accessible place. I will dock speaker points if you are mean or rude to your competitors, judges, or audience. The whole purpose of speech and debate is to have a forum to respectfully debate our ideas or talk about important issues, not a place to shame others out of competing (especially regarding those who are less experienced).

debate (parli, policy, PF, LD, congress):

-I can, in general, keep up with some level of spreading, but as stated above, if your opponent calls "clear", I expect you to make an effort to slow down or enunciate better. If you choose to spread, you are doing so at your own risk; if I can't hear what you're saying, I can't flow it.

-I am fairly tabula rasa which means that I will try to limit the amount of influence my outside knowledge has on the round. If your opponent says something that you believe is incorrect, point that out to me and tell me why that is incorrect.

-I really appreciate roadmaps, whether on-time or off-time, so I know where you're going!

-Your value and value criterion/weighing mechanism are there for a reason and I expect you to use them. In your voters speech, be sure to tell me why you have won the round, specifically by using the value and value criterion/weighing mechanism.

-Specifically for PF and policy: Full disclosure, I have never judged a round, written a case for, or competed in PF or policy. I know the basics, but because of this, please do not expect me to understand all of the jargon; please find another way to explain it to me other than with words I may not understand.

-Overall, be good people. Debate is supposed to be civil where you are attacking the argumentation, not the person. If you choose the latter, that's a great way to not win my ballot.

speech (impromptu, extemp, HI, DI, duo, POI, poetry, prose, interp, ADS, oratory, radio, inform):

-For interps:

-I really appreciate enunciation; it's easier to get your point across if I know what you're saying :).

-I also appreciate it if you have some blocking with your speech, but please don't overdo it to a point where it is distracting.

-Don't worry about memorizing your speech in its entirety, I'd rather have a speech that's fluid while occasionally looking at your speech then one that's choppy if you try to do the full thing by memory.

-Also, I'd enjoy it if your speech had some analysis of or tie in to the real world.

-For platforms:

-I would really like for you to have a roadmap in your speech to tell me where you're taking me.

- I would also love it if you had some sort of thesis or main idea for your speech that you stated explicitly.

-It would be fantastic if you had your speech completely memorized, but I won't mark you down for having a few slip ups. Feel free, if you need, to take a few seconds, breathe, and pick up where you left off. It will always better than trying frantically to recover from a mistake (speaking from experience).

-Please have jokes! Jokes keep your audience entertained, myself entertained, and you entertained as well. That being said, my same rules still go: do not be discriminatory, offensive, or rude when making jokes (this is a great way to be ranked last!).

Overall, have fun. You're here to have fun and so am I! Do not use your time to be rude to others or put them down. Enjoy this time you have while you still have it. Finally, believe in yourself, you're going to do amazing!

Hey! Student judge here, competed in Oratory, a little Prose, Parli debate, and Policy debate. Some things I like to see during speeches/debates:

#1 THING: BE POLITE, both to your opponents and the judge.

Speeches, DO NOT be on your phones or do anything distracting!!! Be polite and respectful to whoever is speaking. For debate, Attack your opponent's case, NOT them!

Speeches:
Project your voice! I can't judge you if I can't hear you

Don't rush! Keep the pace to a speed where everyone can understand you.

Quality over quantity! Get your points across, and if you don't have anything else to say, end your speech. Ending earlier is better than rambling for a couple more minutes. Rambling will only worsen your speech!

Speaking! You need to CONVINCE me to listen to you and vote for you. Use your voice to convey feelings, emotion, and your content.

Debates:

I understand fast paced rounds but make sure that you are speaking in a way that both your judge, AND opponents can understand.

Don't drop arguments. This means if your opponent brings up 3 points, respond to ALL 3. Even if you only have one sentence to say about it, SAY IT. Don't just ignore it.

Debates with prep time, USE your prep time! You have it there for a reason!

ASK QUESTIONS if you don't understand something. I am totally willing to answer! This applies to any sort of confusion, whether it's rules for the event or something your opponent said in debate.