Hey, I'm Audrey (she/her)! I'm a senior at Carrollton High School and a VPF debater on the Georgia and national circuits.

If you plan on calling for cards, please create an email chain and add me. My email is audbro1@trojanstudent.net.

Feel free to let me know if you have any questions before or after the round, either through email or in person.

On to judging (general, more specifically PF?)

- I'm a tech judge. It all comes down to the evidence. I will listen to any argument as long as it's extended, defended well, and not totally stupid. Debate's a game.

- Don't ask if I'm ready before each speech; assume I am. I will let you know if I need a second.

- Off-time road maps are fine but they should be less than 5 seconds. All it takes is "framework, our case, their case" or whichever order you'll be going in. There is zero need for a 30 second roadmap; it should be incredibly brief.

- Go as fast as you want, but don't sacrifice clarity. Do not spread without sending everyone a speech doc.

- I don't flow cross but use it to determine speaker points. Also, note that while what's said isn't being physically written on my paper, it can shed light on holes in arguments.

- Please time yourselves to ensure that you aren't egregiously abusing time. To me, this means 7-10 seconds over. I'll be timing speeches, cross, and prep.

- I don't enjoy hearing theory but have some competitive experience. If you run theory, ensure that it is not an abuse in and of itself. If it's frivolous and the opposing team calls you out, I will drop you, and it won't weigh on me. Don't run disclosure on the Georgia circuit; that's abusive.

- Paraphrasing is acceptable (after the card has been introduced), but if the evidence obviously doesn't say what you frame it as and the opposing team calls you out, it will be considered for my decision. When an opponent asks for evidence, roughly a minute will be given to provide the card before I discount it. (Of course, this doesn't apply to any technological difficulties!)

- Signposting is phenomenal; please do it! Line-by-line rebuttals and summaries are much appreciated. Frontline in second rebuttal/first summary.

- Weighing is essential; do it as soon as possible. If the weighing is left to me, it might not be considered how you would like. When weighing, I'm not looking for a simple "we outweigh on magnitude/probability/scope." Instead, warrant these weighing mechanisms or provide analysis that isn't just throwing debate jargon at a wall in hopes that something will stick.

- Be respectful in a round, or I will tank your speaker points. There is absolutely no reason to be rude.

As for other events,

- I've only had experience judging PF, LD, and Impromptu. That being said, I feel decently competent in most events. I understand how arguments flow through and the necessary aspects of speeches; this will be the reasoning behind my decision. Regarding policy and LD, treat me more like a flay judge.

A few extras,

- I'm generally pretty generous with speaker points. The quality of speeches is taken into account. Unless you did something terrible, your speaks won't be lower than 27.5.

- I disclose. Usually, I will give a few points as to why I cast my ballot and a more detailed view of the round on Tabroom (totally open to questioning after my ballot is submitted). If it's a time crunch at the tournament, I'd rather just disclose my decision and an RFD on Tab.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to email me.

Have a stellar round!

Hi, I'm Allen. This is my third year debating pf on the Georgia and National circuits.

(Borrowed from Edward Bohannon):

I will flow the round, so please sign post. This will greatly benefit me in my ability to follow your arguments, and ensure that I catch everything. If you are going to provide an observation or framework, do not simply tell me to weigh in that manner, explain why I should. Extensions through all speeches are a must if you are going to pick up my ballot. Do not turn a crossfire into a speech. I do not flow crossfire, but it is still a valuable time for the debater to find holes in their opponent's cases. Ensure that you are telling me why you are winning the round, simply reading a card does nothing for the judge, nor for the educational purposes of the round.

Speed becomes an issue when you are not clearly articulating your arguments. Clarity in round is key, and I would prefer to hear a single clear and well explained response over several poorly articulated ones. If I can't understand you, it will not go on the flow. When making my final decision, I take into account; first if an argument was extended throughout the round, then I examine the responses to each argument.

It is most important to consider that debate is intended to be an educational experience. With that being said, I will not tolerate any facetious or degrading remarks in round, as they are counter intuitive to the purpose of the event. As a result, such behavior will be reflected in the speaker points given.

I will expect you to ask questions prior to the round about anything that seems unclear in this paradigm.

My email is jamhou@trojanstudent.net if you want to include me in any email chain. I won't flow cross or any new points after the first summary. Make sure you use evidence for any claim you're making. Don't paraphrase new cards. Extend your impacts through every speech or I won't flow them. Make sure you are constantly reminding me why you win the round.

Please include me in any email chains elijarrett2@gmail.com

PF Debate

I'm a 4 year PF debater at Carrollton high school. I can do speed but due to the online format I can't do spreading so to make it easier for all of us don't spread. As far as Theory and K I would prefer you don't run it but I will judge it fairly, however I don't mind a well done Theory Shell. Whether I time or not is typically based on my mood (I always time prep so you don't have to trip about it), but you should always time yourself, however I feel that timing your opponent is rude and encourage you to avoid it. I don't flow Crossfire but I think its an extremely important speech so I definitely consider it in speaks and I HEAVILY encourage you to bring it up in main speeches. (yes I call Cross a speech but don't just restate your whole contention). Oh and on speaks, I do the highest 4 the tournament allows for so that may be 30,29.9,29.8,29.7 or it may sadly end up in 30,29,28,27. don't blame me, blame the tourney lol. Thank you, and have a great round.

Other Debate Formats

I am relatively Lay but I know and understand the voters such as LD's value premises but I may not know your terms or times off the dome, but I should ask for clarification if I need it. Consult my PF Paradigm for the following topics: My Experience, Speed, Theory/K, Timing, Cross X, and Speaker Score.

Impromptu Speech

I'm a pretty chill judge. I'd prefer if you take your time and if your not a novice try your best to follow a Structure. The most important things for me is if your calm/not frantic and sound clear I don't think the speech itself should stress out a good speaker (but I'm obviously still gonna judge your speech). All in all just have fun and try your best.

Other Speech Formats

I don't really trip about a lot I expect some kind of structure but really my vote comes down to speaking skill and yeah that's mostly it. sorry for the short paradigm but idk much All in all just have fun and try your best. especially in novice divisions.

I am a varsity Public Forum debater at Carrollton high school. I’ve judged Lincoln Douglas briefly but mainly PF.

• I will heavily vote on statistical evidence.

• I will vote on impacts. Prove to me WHY your impact is the most important and/or likely, and tell me HOW this impact is going to happen.

• Outweigh your opponent’s impacts.

• KEEP YOUR OWN TIMES and pay attention to it, especially in online tournaments. Keep time in cross fire, both teams please.

• When it comes to running over, you get 5 second grace before I cut you off. You're always allowed to finish a sentence if it has only a few words left, and asking me if you can finish your sentence takes up more time.

Cross Fire

• I will not flow cross, but if your team or your opponents bring up new defense/ offense during cross, I will write that down so I can remember where it came from.

Evidence

• Perfectly okay with email chains but include me ( premcl@trojanstudent.net)

• If you are sharing evidence actively during a round, not during cross, use the rules for sharing evidence (ask me for clarification if you need it)

• If you want an email chain then set it up at the beginning of the round.

Structure

• I really appreciate “off-time road maps”, signposting, etc.

• This will benefit YOU as I will be able to flow your speeches better and the round will go smoother.

Hi, I'm Nelson I'm a second year pf debater at Carrollton High School.

If you have any questions before or after the round my email is (nelqui@trojanstudent.net) Feel free to ask for my flow or any individual feedback as well.

Most of my ballot comes down to weighing. You can do this successfully through a simple comparative analysis. Explain why your impacts matter more and how they outweigh your opponent’s. Clear and warranted weighing makes it easier for me to evaluate the round and for you to win.

I flow speeches but not cross-ex. That said, if something important comes up make sure to bring it into your next speech for me to consider it.

I’m fine with spreading, but don’t sacrifice clarity. If I can’t hear or understand an argument, I can’t evaluate it and that will hurt you in the long run. Just make sure to stay clear and organized. (For constructive it'd be easier to just share a speech doc)

For dropped arguments, let me know or extend them properly. It’s much easier to win my ballot if you collapse on one or two key arguments instead of going for everything. However, don’t collapse on arguments with turns or major responses against them. Doing so basically concedes the point, and I’ll have to weigh it against you.

When it comes to theory and kritiks, I only judge on the GA circuit and I’m not too familiar with Ks. I don't think prog arguments belong in novice rounds which is what I mainly judge, so I'd advise against them. Focus on learning the fundamentals instead.

Debate is a game, and I think it should be fun. I'm not looking for strict professionalism, but please stay respectful and engaged. I appreciate when debaters find a balance between seriousness and enjoyment.

For speaks, I’m looking for clear speaking and a solid understanding of the topic. Cross ex is a great opportunity to show me that you know your stuff. If you understand what you’re debating and can explain it well, you’ll do fine.

I will disclose after the round.

he/him

If anyone reading this feels that debate or the debate community isn't a safe place for them and wants someone to talk to about it, no matter how small the issue, please reach out. If I or someone I know has made you feel unsafe, please do not hesitate to let me know so I can attempt to rectify the situation and/or change my behavior. You can email me, message me through any social media platform, or talk to me.

Please produce an email chain and add me to it:zimmerlukew@gmail.com

My Philosophy:

Do as you please and I will try my best to meet both teams where they are at. I'm happy with debates fast/slow, K or theory/traditional, quoted/paraphrased, and appreciate most styles of PF.

Strategic Praxis in Front of Me:

• Less is more. Please collapse. You can win almost any debate in front of me by going for like, two arguments; maybe 3.
• Probability weighing is mid. If an argument isn't probable, you should simply answer the link. Probability is derived from the link debate, not your new defense in second summary or innate disbelief in something.
• Lemme hear some warrants.TheONLY way I will ever vote on an argument is if the uniqueness, link, internal link, and impact are extended in every speech in the back half of the round.
• Your weighing should reflect an intimate understanding of your arguments. You should thoroughly research and ponder the relative importance of the arguments you're preparing; your resulting weighing in the debate should be evidence-based and meet the same rigor as any other argument.
• I politely request that someone -- anyone -- simply answer their opponents' weighing.