Don't go too fast. Be clear and concise.

Be respectful to your opponents. It goes a long way! I do not tolerate homophobic, racist, or sexist comments.

Email Chain: traviscornett16@gmail.com

Remember to have fun!

a. cogent logic first and then data

b. clear speech first and then speech speed

c. prove your case and make the comparison

Good luck!

Mostly an IE judge so be sure to speak confidently because I will be taking note of that, even though it won't be a huge factor in my decision it will be a factor. I am somewhat familiar with debate but not an expert. I have competed a few times in college Parliamentary tournaments, and this is my only debate experience. I am not familiar enough with Ks to feel comfortable judging them, so try to avoid those as much as possible. No spreading and no running disclosure theory, we’re trying to make this as fair and accessible as possible. Stand up while speaking, unless obviously you have a disability that prevents that. Overall, be nice because if you're especially rude to your opponents I will down you just on that.

Hello there

My name is Sofia, and my judging career which spans for over four years has seen me muster up a significant amount of experience in a wide range of debate formats/styles such as; the British Parliamentary Format, World Schools Format, World Scholars Format, Public Forum, Lincoln-Douglas, Asian Parliamentary, Big question and Speech Events.

Judging Pattern:

I always approach any debate I'm about to judge as a globally informed citizen, whilst making sure I toss any conceivable personal biases I may have about a topic aside. This means that to convince me in a debate room you must make sure your arguments are credibly realistic and persuasive within the scope of the debate. A couple of things to bear in mind about my judging pattern -

• State your contentions/arguments clearly and back them up with enough analysis to prove your case.

• Make sure you're creating a fair means of engagement towards your opposition. This means that I do not expect you to just present your contentions in a vacuum and expect them to win - I also expect that you challenge the contentions of the opposition and create comparatives to show why your contentions are superior.

• Ensure you highlight your arguments in a well-organized structure - I do not expect that in the middle of contention A, you then transition to contention B abruptly. Take your time to fully explain your contentions while also being time-conscious.

• Role fulfilment is also important. So make sure you fulfil your roles perfectly.

• For Speech Events - I appreciate absolute creativity during your presentation. I expect that you use all that is within your means to execute whichever role you're taking on in whatever speech event I am judging you in. I take notes of your eye contact, body language, energy, and expressions while speaking.

Side Notes:

• I have a slight preference for medium-paced speeches. This does not however mean that if you're naturally a pacy speaker, you're automatically disadvantaged when I'm judging you. I would give your speech equal attention and assessment on a meritocratic basis regardless of how fast you speak, but if you can, just take deep breaths as you present your speech rather than zapping through.

• I admire it when competitors respect, value, and have a deep sense of mutual understanding for each other during rounds. This means I totally detest irritable attitudes such as rudeness, hostility, and intolerance. Kindly be on your best behaviour and be very conscious of how you interact with your co - competitors.

Whenever you come across me in a debate room, I can guarantee you quality judging and the most accurate feedback (either written or orally) , I also hope that in my little way, I contribute towards the growth of your speaking journey.

Hello hello! I’m Peyton Redmyer, she/her (but I go by Marty). I am a junior studying music performance and education at the University of Florida. I was a PF debater in high school for four years and I absolutely loved it! I’m pretty simple. Be a kind person and debate your best and you will do well with me! Good luck!

- Judging Style: I judge off of impacts (numerical 'impacts' of what would happen if I voted or did not vote for your resolution. For example: lives, money, food access, etc). Impact calculus is tasty. I never like to say never, but if you don’t give an impact to an argument, it’s incredibly unlikely that I’ll vote for it. Signposting and/or roadmaps(telling me ahead of time or as you speak what order in which you will be addressing things in your speech. For example: "I'll first be going over my team's case in order, then my opponent's case in order, and then my opponent's comments on our case.")are also highly encouraged. I like to see clear extension, LOVE to see plenty of evidence, and I don't flow during crossfire (so if you need me to know something said in a crossx, repeat it in a speech). I need warrants for cards, and if you tell me for have your speeches to 'extend LastName '22' I will freak out. Nothing bugs me more. Extend arguments, not authors. If it's not worth your time to actually tell me what's in the card or explain to me what it does, you probably don't need to be extending it and are wasting your breath. Lastly, I do not weigh new arguments made late in round. Summary and Final Focus are for paring down your argument and making it as clear and strong as possible. Not only is bringing up new arguments late in round abusive, but it's also just flat-out bad debating. You will lose lots and lots of speaks for it.

- Etiquette: I don’t care if you wear slippers or take your jacket off or what have you. The only thing I’m a stickler about in debate is how you treat your fellow debaters (this includes your partner!!). I was a debater too, so I understand how much work you all have put in and how important these rounds are to you. That absolutely, 100%, does not give you an excuse to be nasty. I understand a little bit of talking over each other and the like, but if you’re making the round hostile it’s very, very unlikely you will win a round I’m judging. The goal of debate is to persuade the judge(s) to your side. If you make people hate you, you’re not going to persuade anyone. This especially applies to any sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. rhetoric. So be reasonable, or I will probably give you some embarassingly low speaker points and you will probably lose the round.

*NOTE: I have tourettes! It's so mild that you most likely will not notice it, but if you see me jerk my head or make odd noises/exclamations, that is why!

I heard you the first time. Please don’t repeat the same thing over and over. I promise my ears work. Really, they do!

And don’t make new arguments in your summary or final focus, you silly goose!

Specifics (If You Need Them):

• Ks - I don’t love Ks, but if your K is reasonable and you can support it, I will vote off of it. (Very rarely do I find that they're reasonable though. Just saying, it's probably in your best interest to argue the resolution). It’s up to your opponents to truly knock down a K. Just know that if you do run a K, you’re starting on your back foot with me.

• Framework- I like framework sometimes. At least more often than Ks. Make sure you can support it and that it's reasonable.

• Grace Periods - I’ll give you five seconds. Please don’t abuse your time. You’re not going to be able to shove much more into an argument in five seconds or less - the grace is really just designed to let you finish your sentence. If you don’t get to all you wanted to say by then - tough. Abusing time bugs me. (This also applies to prep time. I will be timing you). ((That being said, please please please don't set a timer for your opponent that rings when it ends. Don't start aggressively pointing at your time if they go over, etc. etc. I will know if they go over. I consider all of these things very rude and unprofessional, and I will dock speaks for them.))

• Calling Cards - Reading your opponents cards costs prep time. Time starts when you start reading the card, stops when you stop reading it. If it takes you more than 2 minutes to find a card that was asked for, you either have the option to drop it or start taking from your prep time. I will only call cards at the end of the round if the card was (1) highly contested or (2) a debater requests for me to look at a specific card. Beyond that, figuring out card stuff is y’all’s job.

• Frontlining - I’ll acknowledge frontlining if it actually has relevance to you or your opponents’ case. If it doesn't - please don’t tell me over and over that your opponent hasn’t responded to your frontline argument(s). I do not care and it will lose you points. It needs to be incredibly clear to me what the frontline applies to and why it’s necessary, or I will ignore it (and probably roll my eyes a lot).

• Low-Point Wins - Aren’t something I do.

• Spreading - Don't, please. (If you want more explanation on this, ask me in round. I am flexible on a lot of things if I'm given a reason to be.)

• Fancy Definitions - By this I mean using hyper-specific terms for characteristics of the debate (e.g. Burden of Rejoinder). Please speak in more plain terms whenever possible. If you use a term that I would only know if I attended a debate camp or went to a private school, I will most likely understand what you mean, but what's most important is that your opponent may not understand what you mean. I think progressive style debate has many positive attributes, but I think it's also absolutely something that can disenfranchise debaters with fewer resources. If a fancy definition is not absolutely necessary to use, please speak in general terms.
• Theory- Boooooooooooooo.
• Speech Docs - I should be able to get everything I need from what you are audibly saying. The only thing I will be reading is my own flow and MAYBE cards if I am asked to read them. Do not send me your speech. I do not want it (and I think that asking for it of your opponent is unreasonable unless for disability purposes).
• Tricks - Please don't.

TL;DR: Be respectful, don't use overly-complicated debate jargon, and do your best!

I am a former LD debater and I really like studying and discussing moral and political philosophy.

I prefer that competitors speak at conversational or slightly faster paces. I consider a value and criterion as essential to presenting a strong LD case--the value and criterion should frame and guide a debater's arguments and they indicate to me a broader recognition of why the topic is being discussed at all. LD's uniqueness (relative to policy debate) is that it is a debate of ethics and morality (which policy implications can be linked to)...LD gets to be a discussion not limited to questions of what is feasible but also what should be possible ( though yes, the former may and arguably should inform the latter).

I like voters given.

Your arguments should feel like your own. And when it is your turn to speak, be secure in yourself, your logic, and your delivery. Try to enjoy the round and be respectful of your opponent.

Quick Summary - I am a 3rd year college debater in NPDA, I can understand just about any argument that is warranted properly, lack of disclosure when asked will result in a loss unless the other team drops the argument that disclosure is bad, and most importantly have fun and learn something.

Background - WSP. I'm Pat, I competed in PF for most of my highschool debate career. I qualified to multiple post season tournaments in that and did well in policy when I debated it. I am now a debater for William Jewell College and have improved greatly since leaving highschool, breaking at many tournaments, being a tournament champion, and finishing 6th at NPTE nationals.

Style - I evaluate the flow. I really like the K on both sides. I am not as versed in the theory debate as any other aspect of the game. Tech>Truth until its harmful to the educational outcomes of the activity (sky is always green) (genocide good) type things

Spreading - If you cannot keep up with speed make it known as soon as pairings drop to your opponents, otherwise im just evaluating the flow on speed good v speed bad. When spreading I expect a speech doc with full cards in policy, pf, or LD.

Paraphrasing - If you paraphrase your ev will not be worth as much as a full card until i can see the whole card

Contact - Email: Pterry4c03@gmail.com for any further clarification

I have served as a Speech and Debate judge since 2017. I will flow in debate, and prefer a well-paced presentation, with clear logic behind evidence. Eye contact helps as well.

3rd year flay parent judge