First off, have a fun and good debate round (SKIP TO THE BOTTOM TO SAVE TIME). Here is a list of potential arguments run that I talk about.

T- Absolutely. Run it as a timesuck, blippy argument, anything really. And if you are responding to a blippy T arg you can give a simple answer, you don't have to go mega in depth. Make sure to at least cover it though

DA- Please run a DA. Unless a DA would go against an argument (like a K) you are also running. It is always necessary to have offense in a round.

K's- I highly encourage running a K. I know that in 321a debate that it is looked down upon, I dislike that. Now is the time to run a K. If you want to try one out and test it, I can give you advice on how to improve that arg. Make sure to talk on ROJ or/and ROB (role of the judge and role of the ballot), which is simply telling me why I should be voting for the K

CP's- I love this argument, I will not rate it higher than anything else in round though, just to be fair.

PIC(K)'s- This is one preference I do have. Please don't run a floating PIC(k). For open debates that's fine but for novice debates it kinda ruins the education in a debate round, I will rate this arg (Floating PIC(K), normal PIC(K)s are fine) like any other and judge it fairly, however I won't like it.

F- Yes. Framework is a yes.

What is my viewpoint? I'm more of a tech guy than a truth guy and I can relate the most to policy maker, but if you want to do stock issues, or literally anything else, I'm fine with that. If you're having trouble understanding, you can talk to me. This is an educational activity.

Speed- Go as quickly as you want for the warrants, however make sure to slow down for the tag. I can't flow that. I'm not him. If you are wanting to spread (read really fast) then I must be included in the speechdrop, otherwise I won't be able to understand your arguments and you will most likely lose.

Flow- I can keep a flow pretty well. Don't try to test how quickly I can go though.

Speechdrop: Yes, I would like to be invited to the speechdrop.

RFD: I'm not sure for the tournament rules, but if it is allowed then I can give you a reason for my decision, or explain who I voted for and why, while giving feedback to both teams.

Theory: Yes. Have an actual shell for it though

This paradigm might be a bit long, so to sum it up I will judge every argument fairly and I'm fine with pretty much anything. If you have any questions about my paradigm I will answer them. Also if you are confused on what paradigm means, it's literally just what the judge prefers for arguments. I would like to state as well to not be rude to your competitors, I will vote you down without a second thought. I understand that debate rounds can be frustrating and tense but you still need to act appropriately. And a final note: I am not perfect, I will make mistakes, if you really want an argument brought home, make sure to hammer it into my head. Happy debating.

Side Note: If you have any good song recommendations, I won't give you extra speaker points.

This is my third year in debate.

You can spread but if I hear you stumble I will mark you off for it.

Ts are fine but it has to be good and I will most likely not vote on them unless the plan is absolutely nontopical.

Ks are fine as long as they’re ran correctly and the framework is correct.

CPs are very important as often the core part of debate is not squo vs. plan but often it is plan vs. plan.

I feel that DAs are very important if they links to the plan.

I’m very big on stock issues and feel that stressing all of them is important. However, I do feel that the impact of the plan is the most important and I would like to see impact calc.

Debate theory is very funny to me but I won’t throw it out. Feel free to run it on either side.

This is my paradigm but run whatever you feel comfortable with running and have fun! I will listen to every argument!

For an over-arching title, I'd say I'm most often a policy maker judge- meaning I prefer good evidence and real world solutions, etc.

I am first and foremost, an active debater, and therefore love debate- so, please, please, please, don't run the K talking about how it's bad and useless. I do not love this argument at all.

I also don't love PICs, or K's (for novices)- However unlike the former statement, I will vote on them if they are winning policy and/or flow wise.

And onto what I looove- T! I adore T, it is my baby, and I'm a sucker for a true T debate (however don't assume the T will win and go all in on it just because). I am also very okay with time suck T, or other arguments for time suck(It's a part of debate, so meh). T to me is basic framework, and framing/lenses/impact calc are all the best parts of debate.

Aside from that, it's just regular old debate to me, prove a good chance of your cards and you've probably won that argument. Ask me if you've got questions, I'd be glad to answer!

-Haley McGill

Hello, my name is Breanne Mueller, this is my 4th year as a policy debater at Nickerson High School. I went to novice state my freshman year, as well as 2-speaker state my sophomore year.

I mostly vote on stock issues, so if you're the affirmative prove you have all your stock issues, if you're negative tell me why the aff doesn't have said stock issue. I do not just vote on stock issues, but it is a big factor. I personally do not like K's, but I am not opposed to you running them, as long as you know what you're doing. EXPLAIN THEM WELL!! I am fine with any other argument as well, as long as you can explain them by yourself.

Please flow and go along with the flow so the round is not messy and you dont drop arguments.

I hope that everyone is prepared well before tournaments, I understand that technical difficulties happen, as well as internet problems, just about anything can go wrong at a tournament. However, it is your job to also be prepared incase there are those difficulties.

I would like to be included in speech drop, email chains, or any other way of sharing evidence. If you use an email chain, inform me in round, my email isbreanne.mueller@students.usd309.ks.org

I'm a head debate and forensics coach.

Debate: Steps for judging.

1. I look at stock issues first on the affirmative side, HIPS Case (Harms, Inherency, Plan text, Solvency)
2. Then look to prove your plan is Topical if the Negative brings a logical Topicality issue to the board.
3. I look to see if the Aff Case has more benefits(ADvantages) than DisAdvantages.
4. Most of my Reasons For Decisions (RFD) are based on the aff proving the problem is there, they can solve it without harm coming from the plan. Statistics will help here.
5. If the Negative disproves a stock issue, the topicality of the plan is unclear, or proves a disadvantage of the plan happening, the Negative wins.

Forensics:

Speech:

1. Organized logical thoughts and structured speeches.
2. Wants to communicate to their audience (Before, during, and after the performance)
3. Presents, Proves and Explains a Thesis (Opinion about life)

Acting / Interpretation:

1. Presents a teaser that develops an exposition
2. Transitions to an introduction that presents a theme (life lesson)
3. Gives strong supported emotional reactions to the text and situation through blocking, voice, expression, and transitions.
4. The text is presented as a mini-plot line with rising action (beginning), climax (middle), and resolution (end).

I would say that I am a really open judge. I like to listen to stock issue arguments but will listen to any and all arguments as long as they make sense and you tell me why it has weight in the debate round. If you don't tell how I need to be judging then I'm probably not going to vote for you. Debate is a professional competition so you need to be respectful to the people that you are debating. The rule book is a tool you can use but if it is a small minor rule violation and does not affect the debate round a lot then don't bring it up because I won't really take it into consideration into my final decision. I know what debate is and have been in debate for 3 years now so you can use any terminology that you want. I love looking at the evidence you all bring up so if you have any extra copies I would love one. If you use speech drop I will more than likely join in just to see the evidence in there. If you have any other questions about my paradigm, please ask it before the round starts but I won't answer any of those questions until both teams are in the room just so that everyone knows the same information.

AJ Schartz!

I would say that I am a really open judge. I will listen to any and all arguments as long as they make sense and you tell me why it has weight in the debate round. If you don't tell how I need to be judging than I probably not going to vote for you. Debate is a professional competition so you need to be dressed and ready to go. You also need to be respectful to the people that you are debating. The rule book is a tool you can use to win, but if it is a small minor rule violation and does not affect the debate round a lot then don't bring it up because I will not vote for it. I know what debate is and have been in debate for 4 years now so you can use any terminology that you want. I love looking at the evidence you all bring up so if you have any extra copies I would love one. If you use speech drop I will more than likely join in just to see the evidence in there.

Brayden Stevenson!

I am a Debate student and I value stock issues. I also love a good cp, I like K's if they are ran correctly.