Please speak clearly, concisely, and slow enough that I can understand. Supporting your claims with factual evidence is a must. Be prepared on the topic, it is apparent when you are not. Have passion which will sway my vote. Attack the other competitor's claims with reason and evidence. Tell me what arguments you have refuted and why you win the argument. Christina.Cazzola@cobbk12.org

Please treat me like a lay judge.

I will vote on arguments I find more persuasive

Currently a freshman at UGA, debated 4 years in PF at Sequoyah, my email is tel.4704213575@gmail.com for an evidence chain.

(This paradigm is mostly advice for novice, varsity just know I'm basically flay, summary defense is sticky, I'll hear out theory and Ks but not a lot of experience with it so run it at your own risk, also do not paraphrase your case evidence)

General:

• If you are going to spread make sure it's okay with your opponents first
• Tech>Truth but make sure your arguments are clearly warranted and make sense
• I'll keep your prep and time if you want but it makes things easier if you do as well
• Don't be rude - crossfires can get heated, but there's no reason to be screaming at your opponents or unnecessarily condescending
• Please be organized - I don't care too much about order, but if it's all over the place I'm going to struggle to follow along
• I won't pay much attention to crossfires, if something significant happens please acknowledge it in the following speech
• Please don't take forever to send cards if someone calls for them
• Don't lie about evidence - I will probably notice and vote you down
• Speaks do not determine a round, but be clear and organized with good warranting and I will give you high speaks
• I'm fine with post-rounding, but it will never change my decision

Constructive:

Give me well explained and warranted arguments with clearly implicated impacts. I don't care if you disclose or not, but you need to use carded evidence and not paraphrased. (Send me a copy if you're gonna spread or if you have like a million arguments)

Rebuttal:

My preference is carded, well explained blocks; don't just spew evidence at me, tell me why the evidence blocks their arguments. Logical analysis is okay, but if you don't have at least some evidence backing it up I'm unlikely to buy it. Don't just cross apply your case, I want to hear real responses to their argument. Please go line by line, tell me what specifically you are responding to, and go in the order of their case. Second speaking team must give frontlines (ideally in the beginning of their rebuttal), and first speaking team should weigh if they have extra time.

Summary:

Make sure to extend everything you want me to weigh on very clearly; if I don't hear it in summary I won't factor it into my decision. Second speaking team cannot bring up new evidence or arguments, but new frontlines are okay. Make sure to extend clear impacts and do lots of comparative weighing - tell me specifically why your arguments are more important than your opponents.

Final Focus:

Same idea as summary here; make sure to clearly extend arguments and responses, but I won't flow anything that wasn't also brought up in summary. Try to save lots of time for weighing - don't spend all your time extending, weighing is the most important part of FF. Make it very clear what I should vote on, and please extend your impacts, I can't vote for you if you don't have impacts.

Hey, I did PF for four years back in high school. I'm now a sophomore at Georgia Tech studying Computer Science you can ask about that if you want. I am perfectly fine with speed. Don't give off-time road maps, they just aren't helpful in my opinion. I will call for evidence if certain cards are heavily debated in round. I try to disclose if I can do it in a timely manner, but if the round is super messy I might not disclose. If you have any questions, please ask. Be respectful and have fun.

Tab says I've debated 29 tournaments over four years.

I had a wonderful paradigm that I neglected to save, so here is one I stole from my partner:

• If you are going to spread make sure it's okay with your opponents first
• Tech>Truth but make sure your arguments are clearly warranted and make sense
• I'll keep your prep and time if you want but it makes things easier if you do as well
• Don't be rude - crossfires can get heated, but there's no reason to be screaming at your opponents or unnecessarily condescending
• Please be organized - I don't care too much about order, but if it's all over the place I'm going to struggle to follow along
• I won't pay much attention to crossfires, if something significant happens please acknowledge it in the following speech
• Please don't take forever to send cards if someone calls for them
• Don't lie about evidence - I will probably notice and vote you down
• Speaks do not determine a round, but be clear and organized with good warranting and I will give you high speaks
• I'm fine with post-rounding, but it will never change my decision

also stolen but more novice focused:

Constructive:

Give me well explained and warranted arguments with clearly implicated impacts. I don't care if you disclose or not, but you need to use carded evidence and not paraphrased. (Send me a copy if you're gonna spread or if you have like a million arguments)

Rebuttal:

My preference is carded, well explained blocks; don't just spew evidence at me, tell me why the evidence blocks their arguments. Logical analysis is okay, but if you don't have at least some evidence backing it up I'm unlikely to buy it. Don't just cross apply your case, I want to hear real responses to their argument. Please go line by line, tell me what specifically you are responding to, and go in the order of their case. Second speaking team must give frontlines (ideally in the beginning of their rebuttal), and first speaking team should weigh if they have extra time.

Summary:

Make sure to extend everything you want me to weigh on very clearly; if I don't hear it in summary I won't factor it into my decision. Second speaking team cannot bring up new evidence or arguments, but new frontlines are okay. Make sure to extend clear impacts and do lots of comparative weighing - tell me specifically why your arguments are more important than your opponents.

Final Focus:

Same idea as summary here; make sure to clearly extend arguments and responses, but I won't flow anything that wasn't also brought up in summary. Try to save lots of time for weighing - don't spend all your time extending, weighing is the most important part of FF. Make it very clear what I should vote on, and please extend your impacts, I can't vote for you if you don't have impacts.

* Quality of argumentation

* I don't like people getting angry, personal, or condescending during debate

I'm a former competitor in Extemp and Public Forum. I've been coaching for around ten years. I teach world history in Atlanta. I haven't judged much policy debate but I've judged and coached plenty of speech, LD, Public Forum and World Schools.

Things I like: arguments with warrants, citations, consistent logic, argument extensions, relevant questions, speaking skills (good flow, clear, etc...), theory, speech roadmaps, evidence, etc...

Things I do not like: rudeness and arguments without citations and/or warrants.

Analytic arguments are fine for any of the debate events.

Worlds Schools - Do not spread.

Policy - Kritiks, disadvantages and topicality are all fine. I like line-by-line and clear organization in your speeches. For me, an ideal debate would be polite, insightful, and have some relevance to our current historical moment. It would represent the zeitgeist so to say.

If you have any questions at all, please feel free to ask.

mrobinson43@gmail.com

Debate should be about dialog and not confrontation. I realize people get excited when stating and reinforcing a point of view, but please let’s keep it civilized.

Be mindful of your allotted time and articulate your points clearly and concisely.

I like to see eye contact, knowledge of your topic, and interchange between debaters when proving/disproving points.

I am not impressed by debaters repeating the same data points constantly until the allotted time is exhausted or reading a computer screen at 200 miles an hour; rapid speaking is acceptable if it is understandable.

If you want to win, persuade me into viewing the argument from your point of view; you may do this by demonstrating knowledge breadth and depth about the topic you are defending. It is not only about stating your position on the resolution, but you must also be able to defend it and prove to me why your position is the best position during the crossfires.

Cards may be sent to ntillero@comcast.net