Hello!

I have been doing PF debate for about 4 years. I have participated in LD and in multiple speech tournaments. If you have any questions please feel free to ask!! Otherwise, here's a rundown of my expectations :D

1. Clarity and Organization:
- Clear communication is key. Speak at a moderate pace, emphasize well, and avoid excessive repetition.
- Clearly signpost your arguments and maintain a logical and organized structure throughout the round.

2. Content and Argumentation:
- Construct well-developed arguments with logical reasoning and evidence.
- Support your contentions with quality evidence from credible sources.
(Do not make credibility your entire argumentation in rebuttal)
- Be responsive to your opponents' arguments and provide direct refutation.

3. Crossfire:
- Utilize crossfire effectively. This is an opportunity to directly engage with your opponents and clarify key issues.
- Stay respectful during crossfire, and avoid interrupting your opponents.
- do not forfeit your chance of asking questions to the opposing side, you can always ask a question!

4. Framework and Weighing:
- Establish a clear framework early in the round to guide the judge (me) in evaluating the most important issues.
- Articulate clear criteria for weighing impacts and show why your impacts should be prioritized.
- (please don't make frameworks your main points of attack during rebuttal either)

5. Rebuttal and Summary Speeches:
- Use the rebuttal to bring up the main issues in the round and to begin framing the debate in your favor.
- In summary speeches, prioritize the most important arguments and impacts. Provide a clear path as to why you have won (do not bring up new evidence or arguments. I won't count them.)

6. Respect and Sportsmanship:
- Maintain a high level of respect for your opponents and the judge. Avoid personal attacks.
- Be mindful of time limits and follow the established rules and norms of debate.

Hi my name is Edalene. I am a student judge. I did MS Public Forum for 2.

Some Other Notes:

I will be keeping time, but feel free to do so too.

Don’t bring up new information in the summary/ final focus

Weigh your argument. Why is what you said important? Why should I vote for you?

I will not judge based of crossfire, so if any important points were brought up mention them in your speech.

I appreciate signposting

Be respectful to one another

Bring through your argument to your final focus, otherwise I will consider it dropped and will not consider it towards your overall argument, even if th opponent never addresses it.

I am not going to judge based of speaking but please speak clearly and not too quickly so that I can understand.

Good luck and have fun!!

I like it when you speak clearly and at a reasonable voice level.

Just lock in.

add me to the email chain: owusuk@bxscience.edu

for novices:

weigh, extend well, & collapse.

things i like:

• aggressive cx debaters
• well warranted args
• effective lbls
• humor & food

for jvers:

literally do anything; i’ll vote on whatever.

joke paradigm (courtesy of kiep leon & jacob skolnick):

Hi, my name is Kayla ( Kay-Luh) and I compete in Lincoln Douglas debate for the Bronx High School of Science, where I am a NOVICE DIRECTOR and teach all of my freshmen tricks first. Please call me “judge” whenever you refer to me: anything else is disrespectful and I will give you an L12. I agree with every word on *** ******’s paradigm.

TLDR: I will evaluate first on who wins cross-ex. PLEASE SIGNPOST AND WEIGH IN YOUR CX TIME. It’s the only time where both debaters get to speak so I firmly believe voting on anything else is judge intervention and I will NOT EVALUATE IT. Judge instruction is really important!!!! If you don’t give me 3 voting issues you will lose!!

Shortcut

Theory/Tricks- 1

Ks (the less topical the better)- 1

Phil- 3 (I only like tricky phil strats and skep)

LARP- Strike

Long Version

Theory/Tricks- I run these all the time and I think they’re super cute. I default Yes RVIs on neg shells only (affirming is harder!), reasonability and accessibility>fairness>education, truth testing, epistemic modesty, and dispositional DTD (the condition is if you ran more than 1 off). I always eval after the first four minutes of the 2NR, but you can change my mind about that! My FAVORITE EVER SHELL IS CSA THEEORRRY!!! :D :D ;) I love it so much and enjoy beating helpless novices on it at debate camp (my novices would never concede csa theory tho).

Ks- If you read a long Kant overview and then a non-T setcol aff then speaks start at a 29.5. I HATE HATE HATE Cap Ks with a BURNING PASSION and if you run one then I am not evaluating the alt. Idk why these Ks have alts in the first place, theres no such thing as dual power since the only power in debate is the judge (btw I believe in judge intervention).

Phil- I like KANT and only KANT. except for 6 act utilitarianism. Long underviews with 10< permissibility triggers

LARP- i like util but not any larp argument. If you run a disad i will do my stats homework and vote for whoever tried to have a REAL ROUND. To quote my tricks QUEEN ava manaker: “Grow up and read a real argument.”

Speaks Paradigm

• If you bring me chipotle and you’re not Le Wang auto 30.
• Speaks start at a 29.8 if you read csa

Novice Paradigm: Hi guys! Everything above this was probably confusing for you but don’t worry! Please don’t read progressive arguments just because you think I’ll like them, I’m happy to listen to your trad round! That being said, if you don’t read at least 1 theory shell in every speech (and cx ofc!) I will not hesitate to DROP YOU WITH MINIMUM SPEAKS. The main thing you should know before the round starts is that I RUN THE ROUND LIKE A 17TH CENTURY DICTATOR. That means NO FLEX PREP, NO POST ROUNDING, and if you do ANYTHING that isn’t 100% EDUCATIONAL, I will LECTURE YOU. I just think that debate is an educational activity and we should do our best to be as educational as possible!

Hey! My name is Anna Rams, she/her, and I am a sophomore in high school. This is also my fifth year participating in Speech & Debate, with categories including Public Forum, Lincoln Douglas, Extemp, and Congress.

Please let me know if you have any questions about any decisions made during a round.

Please signpost and weigh throughout the round. Also, with weighing, please make your weighing more than one sentence. Elaboration is key.

No stress about stuttering; I care more about if your arguments get across. However, if I cannot understand your speech (excessive mumbling, screaming, spreading, etc,) there will be more speaker points taken off.

I won’t count cross as part of the debate, only when points brought up in cross are carried on in a summary/final focus.

I will keep time in the round, both for the formality of the debate, and for my judging. Feel free to keep your own time throughout the round.

Most importantly, just enjoy yourself and have fun!

Hi! I'm Alessia sgroi , freshman student at CSI high school for international studies. This is my 3rd year debating and im fairly new to judging . Here are my debate preferences...

Clarity>speed

impact calc is preferred , esp if you bring up how it impacts further generations

Off time roadmaps are fine , don't make them too long though

Don't bring up new points after 2nd speaker cross.

The more passionate you are while you deliver your speech , the better you come across!

Deliver your speeches to me, your arguments are meant to convince me , not the opposing team

Final focus means the most to me. You should be writing my ballot for me . Don't spend too much time recapping , spend more time weighing on how your side is more worthy of the AFF/neg ballot and how ur contentions are more impactful.

Be respectful through crossfire! Its great when your enthusiastic through cross but please dont yell at the other side, make faces , etc. Also do not interrupt through speeches

Impact calc/magnitude plss!

BE LOUD PLEASE!!! Project your voice to me as you read your speech , and if your going to spread , spread LOUDLLYYY!!!

Taking these points into mind will be in your best interest if you want me to cast your ballot for your team .That's all! Have fun ;3

Hello, my name is Ayrah and I am a sophomore student in high school. I have debated public forum for three and a half years, and this is my second year of judging debates. That being said, here are a few of my preferences/tips for when it comes to a round:

1) I don't take crossfire into consideration unless you bring up what was said in your speeches. So, if you managed to get your opponent to slip up during a crossfire or perhaps you answered/rebutted their questions/points cleverly and really want to showcase that to me, you should include it in your summaries, final focuses or rebuttals. Be weary not to drop any arguments.

2) I don't mind if you talk fast, just don't spread. I will time you but I also recommend you time yourself to be able to know when and how to pace yourself.

3) Weighing is very important to me, because your weighing is pretty much selling your arguments to me. I would like to see weighing in the summary and especially final focus, and I wouldn't mind seeing it in rebuttal speeches as well. But don't make your weighing just one sentence such as "We win on scope because we affect more people because [insert basic response]" etc. I'd like to see you elaborate on your weighing because again, that is a big part of what sells your arguments to me. In addition, when you state your contentions during your first speech, I need to know why your reason for or against an argument matters because again, you want to emphasize that your contentions matter (impact) and aren't just a list of pros or cons. Also, make sure you don't have any defensive arguments or else you have little to no impact.

4) I prefer the use of a framework but make sure it isn't anything like "If we prove to you that the pros outweigh the cons we win" because that's rather obvious and so it ends up being a waste of a few crucial seconds.

5) I recommend you use your prep time wisely and not let it go to waste because it is given to you for a reason. Writing on the spot can be very stressful (trust me, I'd know), but if you learn to maximize your prep time, it will gradually make things easier for you.

I hope this doesn't come off as intimidating! I am no perfect debater and I've definitely had my moments both in the spotlight and in moments I wish I could forget when it comes to debate. Just because I might be older or have debated longer doesn't necessarily mean that I am much better than you. I am just using my debate experience over the course of the past few years to try and provide any insight I can to help you improve, and of course, to try to be a fair judge. With all that said, I wish you good luck!

Former Policy Debater from the UDL circuit and NFL (Nation Forensic League).

Debated for the University of Louisville (2005-2010).

Iowa City High school 2012-2016

Northwestern University 2016-2020

Northwestern University Coach 2020-???

I want on the email chain: josephweideman01@gmail.com

--I generally know more about policy arguments, but I'm happy to vote for the K/think it is very strategic and usually answered badly.

--In K debates, both sides need to do a much better job of: 1) using examples/contextualizing their offense; 2) debating the other team's argument instead of a caricature of their argument; 3) evidence based debating

--I care a lot about evidence quality. I'll usually read a good chunk of the cards during the debate.

--I think a lot of debates are determined by which team has the better strategic vision/ability to weave the different pieces of a debate together into a win. I do not like having to piece together a debate without instruction from debaters on how to do so.

--I will be very quick to ignore evidence composed of sentence fragments that make no grammatical sense when put together.

--Inserting re-highlighting of the other team's ev is fine, but you must explain what you're inserting/why you think it helps you.

--T-USFG/FW: I think the vitriol with which this argument is approached by many people on both sides of this issue is bordering on the absurd. FW has argumentative merit. So do the answers to FW. Clash is good (If you want to convince me otherwise you'll need to explain what debate is without clash). I care less about fairness gripes. Stop saying things are intrinsic goods and instead use descriptive language to explain why they matter. Aff teams' impact usually outweighs but I consistently vote neg when the aff shotguns offense and fails to answer the neg's defense/tricks and/or because clash turns aff offense.

--I am uninterested in adjudicating personal attacks/arguments about things that happened outside of the debate.

--Conditionality = Good

--T vs Plans: Least favorite type of debate to judge (other than theory debates...maybe). I think evidence quality/predictability matters a lot and its usually silly to put limits above everything else.

--Make choices please.