Personal Stuff

I'm John

Currently a Senior at Montgomery Academy.I am ranked #1 in the State Overall in Speech and Debate.

I'd prefer if you sent me case; add me to the chain: john_alford@montgomeryacademy.org

If you have any questions about me, my background, or my paradigm- I'll be happy to answer them at any time.

I'll gladly answer any questions you have in-round as long as it doesn't give either side a competitive advantage.

Notes for the novice tournament:

All of the above and below apply. With that being said, I expect traditional rounds with hopefully some policy scattered about. Remember that your opponent is also a novice so they'll be just as nervous as you are. Most of all, remember that your JUDGE knows that you are a novice and totally understands if you slip up, stutter, forget an argument, or don't know how to respond to your opponent's arg. Try to have fun bc this is a learning experience.

Traditional debates are won almost entirely on weighing. Weigh the framework properly, and implicate magnitude, probability, and time frame for contention level arguments.

If you don’t understand the below information, that’s totally okay.

General (in round) Important Stuff

TECH>TRUTH. I love weird arguments and will evaluate LITERALLY ANYTHING--BUT the weirder the argument the lower the threshold for responses.

If it isn't extended/isn't on my flow-->it doesn't exist.

If you don't respond to your opponent's claim-->it is true

I think speaker points are stupid. Obviously I'll give the better speaker more speaks. However, I'll boost or lower your speaks based on attitude, sportsmanship, and general debate decorum. If you make me laugh, I'll boost your speaks.

I'll be honest with my RFD. That being said, any criticism I give you is constructive :)

Don't post round me, I find it cringe. Also, I flow weird. My flow is usually really messy/hard to follow, so I wouldn't ask to inspect it with the intention to prove my decision wrong. I'm not the one you are debating LOL

Judging Preference (In order from most to least preferred):

~Note that my preferences have no effect on my decision and REMEMBER... I like everything~

1) LARP- I find it pretty middle of the pack in terms of how much I enjoy evaluating it. However, I probably have the best grasp of it considering I've used it a lot in the past. Framework is big. I'll basically evaluate the round however I'm told (given proper evidence and warrants). Otherwise, I'll just default to magnitude, probability, and timeframe (assuming framework or other influencers of my ballot are absent).

2) Trix- I enjoy trix the most. (I've run them quite a bit at national tournaments). However the more hyper-specific/ frivolous the trix are, the less likely I'll be to expect a well-fleshed-out response from your opponent. Trix aren't typically warranted so your opponent's response doesn't have to be warranted. They are super abusive, so if you read trix aginst a novice ur speaks will be trashed.

3) K/Critques- I love K debate. The reason I put it below LARP is because I wish I had more experience going against it. That being said, I understand ROJ/ROBs really well and Cap Ks are my bread and butter (if you run cap I'll probably give you good speaks). I want to see a well-fleshed-out identity K (Considering I decide whether or not you succeed, I don't default to debate being racist, homophobic, etc.). Have a clear ballot story..

4) Trad- I have no problem with trad but I enjoy it the least because it's boring. I don't think values have almost any function in debate so please don't spend a minute and a half on morality vs. justice. I need clear weighing and value criterion clash and probably err on the side of over-explanation in traditional debates.

5) Phil- I also have no problem with philosophical arguments. The reason it is ranked last is because I have NO experience with phil debate. However I will evaluate it fairly. I have a friend in love with phil so I sorta know what to expect. I've just never run it or competed against it.

General Notes About Debate Sub-Styles (in no specific order).

1) Speed- Speed's okay. Go as fast as you want but slow down on any analytics not in the doc. I'll say clear if you're too fast.

2) Prep time- Use it however you want, flex prep is cool as long as your opponent is fine with it.

3) Topicality - I love T. I evaluate the T flow before I evaluate anything else. I lean towards reasonability on T since there isn't an objective limit on the topic -> language is arbitrary.

4) Theory - I default to competing interps, no RVI's, DTD on shells against entire advocacy, drop the argument for everything else.

5) Disads - read them. Not a huge fan of 2 card DA's with UQ and an internal link in the same card but I'll still vote for it. I have a pretty high threshold for PTX DA's because I think they are especially egregious.

6) CP's - yes. default to 1-2 condo good unless convinced otherwise. PIC's fine if you can handle the perm debate.

hello! my name is Aalekh Arapalli and this is my second year of speech and debate. for debate, I mainly compete in CX (Policy) debate but I have done PF once before. for speech events, I do extemp, expository and impromptu. this activity isn't always about winning but learning as well.

also for all debate events don't take cross to seriously and yell.

if you have a question about anything in my paradigm you can ask before round.

if you make a email chain, add aalekharapalli5409@gmail.com and add madisoncentralwa@gmail.com

policy:

tech > truth for policy

speed: I am find with any speed as long it is clear.

DAs: I am ok with most DAs if there uq, link, internal link and impact. If you have either link or internal link then it should be fine but neither means its an incomplete da.

CPs: I like CPs but make sure the CP competes with the plan and has a net benefit. I am also fine with CP theory.

Ks: You can run any type of Ks but make sure you explain it well. You have to explain the K not just read cards saying what its about.

T: I am fine with topicality and I can vote on it

Theory: I'm fine with it just have voters and explain.

In the 2nr and 2ar explain why you should win the debate. Don't just talk about your side of the argument but talk about how you have beaten the opp team on this argument.

have fun!!

PF:

I still prefer tech over truth but I will evaluate truth a little more in PF.

Theory: since I will be judging novices, you prob shouldn't be reading theory in pf

Speed: I am ok with any speed as long it is clear.

Don't paraphrase evidence.

You can ask the other team for cards but you have to use your own prep-time for it.

You have to refute the opposite teams contentions and have clash. You should also try to refute impacts and prove your impact matters more.

Signpost which arguments you are moving on to.

I will be paying a good amount of attention during cross-ex for pf.

Have fun!!

LD:

Speed: during your framework don't speak as fast but during contentions any speed is ok.

plans and CPs: I am fine with plans in LD and CPs in ld.

framework: Since it is LD, I would expect all debaters to have framework but it isn't neccesary.

kritiks: I am fine with Ks in LD just make sure that you explain your framework.

T: I am fine with topicality but make sure you have limits and ground.

theory: I'm fine with it just have voters and explain.

have fun!!

extemp:

i am fine with you using a notecard but don't just stare at it the whole time.

make sure you have a walk pattern.

make sure you are answering your question correctly.

be confident even if you don't know what you are talking about.

make sure you talk slow and don't speed up.

ask for time signals in round.

have fun!!

Other speech events:

be confident

make sure you are showing emotion in your speeches.

have fun!!

Hey guys, I'm a high school debater; I'm familiar with all debate events and I'll evaluate basically anything, but the most important thing for you as a competitor is proving why I am voting for you. Anyways, my paradigm is pretty simple...

Here's my email; I would like to be added to the email chain (if applicable): dbai265872@gmail.com

Tech>Truth

I don't mind speed.

DA's and CP's are cool

I will evaluate K's and Theories,but you must argue them properly. Don't just throw a Kritik at your opponents just to do it and fill time.

Theory arguments must be properly executed for me to evaluate them

IMPORTANT NOTE: Please be professional and respectful. There's no need to be rude or to yell over your opponents; if you're disrespectful, I will dock your points. Most importantly, debate is a game. Debate smart, try your best, and have fun.

Information to Know:

I am an 11th grader at Oxford High School and have judged only once before. The only events I have judged were LD and Interp events.

For Debate, if you are not clear in your speech, I will not flow or write down what you have said. A reminder: pretend I am not there, as my role as a judge is to approach the debate with no prior knowledge. Your job is to inform and persuade me, whether you are on the Affirmative or Negative side.

For Speech events, be confident. I am not harsh with critiques and understand that everyone is a novice, and it may be your first time presenting. I will provide time signals whether you want them or not, and I will not dock points for minor mistakes. However, the one thing I will not be lenient about is if you exceed the time limit of your event.

With all this in mind, do your best, and I hope you do well at your very first tournament!

I’m a debater at St. Andrew’s, this is my third year doing it and as of this year the only debate event I haven’t done is Parliamentary. My first couple years I was a CX kid so I’m fine with speed and more nuanced arguments as long as you share a doc. I try and keep up with the news so I should understand most topics I haven’t actually debated but do try and explain your cases cause not every judge is going to know everything. Tech > Truth but I prefer Techy Truth. Also I hate that I have to say this but if you say anything bigoted or hateful I will drop you and report you to tab so please don’t make me do that.

Email: hrcooper25@gosaints.org

LD: This is what I’m doing this year so I hope you stick with it, so far it’s been pretty fun. With that being said I don’t pretend to know everything about LD so I may make a mistake or judge you a little more like I was judging CX and for that I’m sorry.

I love a good framework debate and personally, I think it’s one of the easiest ways to win a round. If you win framework and use that to force me to not weigh your opponents case you’re doing the right thing, but if you lose this portion of the debate it’s not an automatic loss.

I know it’s not the norm in Mississippi to share a doc but if you want to I’d love that and may give you extra speaks. I think it’s one of the biggest things lacking in MS LD so if you’re fine with it, it literally cannot hurt you, just don’t share if your opponent doesn’t want to.

PLEASE SIGN POST

Also finally I stole this from my coach but it’s so true. Too many NR’s and 2AR’s are focused on not losing and not on winning. Plant your flag somewhere, tell me why you’re winning those arguments and why they’re the key to the round. Don’t rely on defense to win cause it won’t.

CX: Fine with speed, K’s, T, theory and stuff like that as long as you can explain it well.

Honestly if you want to see a detailed explanation of what I think go to my coach Mr. Jharick Shields’s paradigm and it sums it up pretty well.

Please email me the doc, I’m not a super big fan of Speech Drop.

K Debate- Please have read the lit and be ready to explain it well cause I probably haven’t. I’ve faced stuff from Eco-Socialsim to Radical Daoism so I at least think I know the extent of where this can go so just be ready to give a good alt and a clear link to the case. If you are reading an afro-pessimism K I have read the lit there so don't bs with that cause I'll know.

T- I think meaningless T debate is stupid but I will vote for it if there’s a clear violation of the topic. Also explain your voters here, why should I care about education, fairness, etc.

Theory- I guess I’ll vote for it but you’ve got to be really good or your opponent has to be violating something major. I hate useless timewasting theory overviews especially if you know your opponent's pretty trad so just don't do that.

I’m fine with other stuff just don’t be a jerk in cross pls

PF: I’ll make it short, use your evidence, and don’t just rely on defense. I need offense on my flow at the end of the round to vote for you so please make sure you have it. I feel like a lot of PF rounds people just speak past each other so make sure there’s clash on at least most of your opponents' contentions. Also I am probably not paying attention to grand cross cause I am literally yet to see a good example of that yet, including in the rounds I've debated myself.

Other: Just please be courteous and clear about how you win. Again just look at Mr. Shield’s paradigm for general stuff. I have debated worlds before and love seeing style, so if you're doing that please use the jargon and don't make it a 3 vs 3 CX round.

Good luck you guys and I look forward to the rounds!

Debate:

I currently do PF and have a little experience with Congress, so I am familiar with the structure of these types of debate. The main things I emphasize for debates in general is argumentation and logic. If you're really good with those, then you'll be winning me over. Speaking wise, make sure that you are clear with your diction and make sure you're not spreading or being too aggressive. I will dock speaker points if you do so. Also, make sure you signpost. It just makes it easier for everyone. If you're bad with speaking, then I simply will just not consider your arguments. I'm fine if you use tech, just don't use it at a crutch. I believe that debate should be a good mix of logic, organization, and tech. Overall, be clear and logical during the debate. Good luck with your rounds and have fun!

Debate

Debate can often times get a little heated between each other so I will be looking for the team that is able to keep there calm for the entirety of debate. It won't necessarily win them the round, just being aggressive will lose you points.

Even if someone says something ridiculous in round, I will take it into decision unless it is refuted by the other side. (Tech>Truth)

I don't flow cross.

If possible talk at a conversational speed so Im fully able to understand everything that you are saying.

Speech

Speech varies on the event but hand motions, eye contact and confidence will go a long way.

Hello and good day I am a sophomore at Oxford high school. I did policy my entire freshman year so I've never debate LD or PF before so I'm sorry if my judging isn't as good as it would be... In regards to speech in my freshman year I did extemp and impromptu.

In regards to policy debat or debate in general I am fine with spreading on any levels just not at "step on the gas" level. I require for you to share your case with if it is policy debate me so I can follow along no matter what thus the norm in policy debate. I also prefer progressive debate and not being up arguments mid round or late round.

For speech as long as you speak clearly, don't repeat things already said in your speech, and speak confidently and professionally if you follow these things you should be good :).

Please don't use any policy jargan or any complicated terms.

Also you must call me "my esteemed judge and great powerful senator Hom"

Hey guys, I'm Teshy Jalf. I am in my second year of competing in Speech & Debate. For debate, I have competed in Policy and Congress. For speech events, I have done events from Extemp to Dec to DI. I will try to give my ballots the best way possible. BUT, don't take my ballots to heart. At the end of the day, Speech & Debate is about having fun and learning something, not the trophies. So, here's my paradigm:

Debate In General: I am a flow judge. If you give me a good flow story, I will be better able to evaluate the round. Please be nice to all competitors. I am a tech over truth judge. Meaning I will evaluate the round based on the arguments made in the round, not anything outside of the round. I will be timing your speech, if you go over 5 seconds of the speech time, I will hold up a fist, and not flow. While flowing, I might miss your signposting, so be extremely clear while signposting. I will not tolerate anyway of discrimination. If you make sexist, racist, transphobic, or any kind of discriminatory remarks, I will not hesitate to give you the loss and report you to the tabroom

You can add me on the email chain: AngadJalf2008@gmail.com

But Speechdrop is highly preferred

Policy:

-I can handle speed, but if you go too fast, I will yell "clear". Slow down on taglines and signposting

-You can run most OFF case arguments- DA's, CP's, Topicality

-I'm not too familiar with K's other than Cap K. If you want me to evaluate a K, explain it to me well.

-You can run theory, but it needs to be executed well and not a timesuck.

-I'd appreciate collapsing in the NEG Block and 1AR

-In the 2NR and 2AR- GIVE ME VOTERS. In these two speeches, you need to be giving me voters issue as to why I vote on your side

-Impact Calculus and Weighing Impacts go a LONG WAYYYYYY

PF:

-I haven't quite competed in PF, but I have watched rounds.

-Same as policy, If you go too fast, I will yell "clear". Slow down on taglines and signposting

-I believe paraphrasing evidence is unethical

-Like most PF rounds, things get heated, that being said, be civilized during speeches

-Please don't yell in Speeches. I won't be able to flow, if I can't hear you

-DON'T YELL IN CROSS EXAMINATION

-Don't make petty comments during cross examination.

-Same as policy, give me voters in Final Focus

LD:

-I have never competed in LD, but that does not mean I do not know how LD works.

-This is a value and moral debate, that being said, I don't want a LD debate turn into a policy one

-I will not tolerate Spreading. I will yell clear if you go too fast. Slow down on taglines and signposting

-I'm not a huge fan of Plans/Counterplans, or Kritiks in LD

-Debaters tend to read some old philosophers theory without explaining it. Explain to me what your framework is.

-Make your arguments understandable to me

Congress:

-Congressional debate is about presenting effective arguments that further ongoing debate. My congress judging is based off that sentence

- I love a good intro, but make sure you tie the intro back into your conclusion

- DECORUM- Maintain good decorum throughout the round. Address each other as representative/senator, don't speak without permission from the PO

-Rehash, I get it, y'all are novices, rehash is bound to happen. But take it from a judges perspective, competitors will go up and give the same old speech that everyone else has given in a late cycle without ever addressing anyone else in the chamber. It gets boring after a while. That being said, if you are able to address other members of the chamber, or even if you try to address other members of the chamber, I will highly appreciate it

Extemp:

- I will default to a 5 down handsignal, if you'd like something else let me know

-You can use a notecard, but I still prefer some eye contact. The notecard is there to help you, not for you to use it as a crutch

-You should have a walk pattern but you should not move around every single sentence

-Hand gestures are good, but EXCESSIVE hand gestures will be too distracting.

Other Speech Events:

-Let me know if you want time signals

-Have vocal and tonal variation

-I will appreciate good eye contact and hand gestures

- For declamation (Dec), your intro needs to be extremely distinguished. I need to know when you go into your intro and when you move out of it

Interp:

-Let me know if you want time signals

-When it comes to interpretation events, I like to see the fluidness of your speech. Of course, you may stumble or stutter, and I don't judge too harshly for it unless it's excessive.

-Memorization of the speech, long pauses during delivery, etc. will affect rankings.

-I'm looking heavily at delivery, such as tone, speed, and blocking.

-Eye contact and facial expressions play a BIG role in my ranking. I want your facial expressions to match what is going on in the piece

-I will also pay a big attention to the plot of the story and how you drive the plot throughout your piece

-For prose and poetry, the book is there to enhance your performance, not for you to completely read off of it.

Lastly- This is probably one of your first tournaments ever. As I said before, Speech & Debate is about having fun, not the trophies. Good luck and have fun!

For debate, I'm going to keep it extremely simple straight up with you. Debate will get progressively technical as you gain more and more experience. At Stennis specifically, I'm mainly looking for the team/individual that can coherently explain to me which arguments are the most important in the round, and WHY you win that argument. Try your hardest to speak confidently, and I promise you will do well.

I'm fairly experienced in LD and PF, so I'm completely fine with any debate jargon, speed (as long as it's not spreading), and any other technical stuff you want to run.

For speech, I'm simply looking for the individual/team that speaks as clearly and delivers their speech as professionally as possible.

Thanks for reading this, and good luck

I am in my 2nd year of debate. I have experience in all debate, but mainly do policy.

Debate

I do not tolerate screaming at each other or rudeness.

I love clash and good argumentation.

Speaking skills are very important in this public speaking activity.

I don't like unclear arguments.

Truth over Tech. I like arguments that are grounded in the real world.

Speak clearly.

But most importantly, have fun!

Speaking(Extemp)

In intro, flow through all points that you are talking about.

Don't rush through your speech.

Keep it professional

(Extemp) - It is ok if you use a note card, but I might prefer a speech without a notecard

Good luck

I participated in speech and debate in High School and have been judging debate all year this school year.

I am generally a tabula rasa judge beginning with a blank slate and look to see which side presents the best overall arguments. I tend to put a greater burden of proof on the affirmative since the negative can usually argue to the status quo.

Not everyone has the time or ability to read paradigms before rounds so for the sake of equity I won't include the complete cheat code towards getting my ballot, however I will tell you a few tips and show you what to avoid.

PF- Give me voters as early as possible. The longer I have to think and weigh evidence the better the decision I make. DO NOT give me a voter with a weak warrant as I will not except bad warrants for huge voters like Nuclear war since you guys seem to bring it up in EVERY round on EVERY topic. I would rather have a few small impacts that are rock solid than both sides claiming nukes will start flying if the other side gets their way.

LD- Some people are LD nerds, I am not one of them. Structure your arguments and more importantly your rebuttals in a way that maintains the topic. A large number of LD debaters stray very far from the topic in my experience and it can make it very hard to flow and declare a victor.

BQ- Sadly We don't do a lot of Big Questions around these parts. Enough said

Policy- Case heavy arguments (as policy usually is) are fine I get it you have an intricate 400 page essay on how to collect rainwater from roof awnings to solve the freshwater crisis in the southwest. Understanding that however I do want to see as much interaction with the opposing side as possible. Try to be as direct as possible when responding to critiques.

Interp Speech events- Your piece selection needs to resonate with you, own your work.

Informational Speech events- A mix of easy to follow logic and evidence will go a long way. Make sure your logic is clear and your evidence is well thought out.

Debate events:

BE KIND TO EACHOTHER!!!

Eye-contact, clear speaking, prove your side is better not just that the other side is wrong

Speech events:

be engaging; be quiet when others are preforming in the room, eye contact

speak clearly, please pause to collect your thoughts instead of stuttering

Jay Rye - Head Coach - Montgomery Academy

Experience- I have been involved with L/D debate since 1985 as a former L/D debater, judge, and coach. I have been involved with Policy debate since 1998. I have coached Public Forum debate since it began in 2002. While at many tournaments I serve in the role as tournament administrator running tournaments from coast to coast, every year I intentionally put myself into the judge pool to remain up to date on the topics as well as with the direction and evolving styles of debate. I have worked at summer camps since 2003 - I understand debate.

Philosophy

I would identify myself as what is commonly called a traditional L/D judge. Both sides have the burden to present and weigh the values and/or the central arguments as they emerge during the course of the round. I try to never allow my personal views on the topic to enter into my decision, and, because I won't intervene, the arguments that I evaluate are the ones brought into the round - I won't make assumptions as to what I "think" you mean. I am actually open to a lot of arguments - traditional and progressive - a good debater is a good debater and an average debater is just that - average.

While for the most part I am a "tabula rasa" judge, I do have a few things that I dislike and will bias me against you during the course of the round either as it relates to speaker points or an actual decision. Here they are:

1) I believe that proper decorum during the round is a must. Do not be rude or insulting to your opponent or to me and the other judges in the room. Not sure what you are trying to accomplish with that approach to debate.

2) Both sides must tell me why to vote "for" them as opposed to simply why I should vote "against" their opponent. In your final speech, tell me why I should vote for you - some call this "crystallization" while others call it "voting issues" and still others just say, "here is why I win" - whatever you call it, I call it letting your judge know why you did the better job in the round.

3) I am not a big fan of speed. You are more than welcome to go as fast as you want, but if it is not on my flow, then it was not stated, so speed at your own risk. Let me say that to the back of the room - SPEED AT YOUR OWN RISK! If you have a need for speed, at the very least slow down on the tag lines as well as when you first begin your speech so that my ears can adjust to your vocal quality and tone.

4) I am not a big fan of "debate speak: Don't just say, cross-apply, drop, non-unique, or other phrases without telling me why it is important. This activity is supposed to teach you how to make convincing arguments in the real world and the phrase "cross-apply my card to my opponents dropped argument which is non-unique" - this means nothing. In other words, avoid being busy saying nothing.

5) Realizing that many debaters have decided to rely on the Wiki, an email chain, and other platforms to exchange the written word, in a debate round you use your verbal and non-verbal skills to convince me as your judge why you win the round. I rarely call for evidence and I do not ask to be on any email chain.

Hi! I'm Sara :)) I am in my fourth, and final year of speech and debate, most of my experience is in PF and interpretation events. My RFD will be based on the following for debates:

PF:

• Speed isn't a huge issue, but if you speak too fast I may not be able to flow. (signpost!!) {basically a roadmap}
• I don't flow crossfire so bring up any arguments you thought were essential.
• TECH >TRUTH meaning that I will take anything said in round as fact unless the opposing side is able to rebut thoroughly.
• Re-iterate arguments so I know that they are important for your case. (there is no such thing as redundancy in pf)
• Final Focus is for key voting issues, weigh your arguments.Nothing new should be brought up here unless it was brought up in summary.

LD:

- LD is value debate, so value clash should be a major point of the round. Any framework is fine as long as you are able to explain to me why you win the round.

Some general things I expect :)

• Be respectful (this goes for the judge AND opponents) I don't want to dock points for this. Any types of disrespect (rude commentary, leaving in the middle of a performance, talking during someones piece etc.) will dock you points.
• (This is for mainly debate) If you go over time, I will no longer continue to flow what you are saying. (time yourself, i'll be timing as well)
• Try your best !!!
• Most importantly, have FUN !!

I'll give more detailed explanations in ballots, don't stress, you guys got this :)

Debate

-Please state contentions/points clearly

-Do NOT spread (talk extremely fast; not understandable)

-Please ask questions during crossfire and remember that all speakers should talk during grand cross

-Weighing is important and preferred, especially in FF

-I expect respect (to me, and to your competitors)

-Most importantly, have fun! :)

Speech/Interp

Nothing specific just try to remember a walking pattern, memory blips are okay, just keep going!

Hi everyone! I'm a student from Oxford High School. So far, I've participated in LD, PF, Impromptu, Duet Acting, Original Oratory, and Declamation. Here are some things to know for when you're in-round:

DEBATE

• You're free to time yourself. I'll give time signals if requested. I won't flow anything that goes over time unless you're finishing up a sentence.
• This goes without saying: don't speak at insane speeds, enunciate your words, and project. If I can't understand you, I can't flow what you're saying. Don't sabotage yourself!
• Please be as civil as possible and keep your composure throughout the round. Speaker points will be deducted if you can't maintain respect for your opponent.
• Stay on topic. Don't waste time debating something insignificant.
• Use up as much time as possible. If you have any time left in your speech, it doesn't hurt to go over your points again. Reinforce your case!
• Please signpost! This makes it easier for me and your opponent to flow and keep track of arguments.

SPEECH

• Same as in debate: if I can't understand you, RIP. Please project and enunciate your words.
• Try to fill up your time as much as possible.
• Be expressive and varied in tone. Engage your audience. Blocking is great! Eye contact is great! Basically, keep it interesting :)

Above all, enjoy yourself! Good luck y'all!!