Email: colinabe05@gmail.com

Experience: I am new to the novice packet, but I will do my best to flow and follow along. I am good with speed, but just make sure to slow down on analytics and tags so I can hear what arguments you want me to hear and be able to flow your cards better.

Philosophy: I think debate is a game that improves education and helps with public speaking. I am a tech-over-truth judge.

Affs: I think that affs should make sure to extend their cards and answer the opponent's cards clearly and concisely. I want the aff to tell me the story of the round and how they prove their impacts via proper impact calc.

K's: I don't like K's, and I don't think I ever will. I don't care if I am not preferable to any K debaters; I will still stand by my beliefs. The alt needs to be explained clearly as to how it works in the status quo. You need to prove how the aff links to the K and explain it well. The framework should be explained from both sides, and how I should weigh the round. You also need to prove how the alt solves better and weigh the K's impacts against the aff's impacts, and prove it's worse and will happen now. Finally, warrant it out and explain it clearly. Reading buzzwords doesn't give me enough reason for me to vote unless the aff doesn't answer it well, either.

Novices:I have noticed this in a lot of rounds, but most of the novice teams forget to mention the cards they had from their constructives when going into your rebuttals. Please don't drop your cards and try extending them and analyzing them in the rounds. Then make your arguments in the round. I value argumentation over spreading, so make sure to do that.

Everything else: Tag team is fine, just don't overtake your partner answering the questions. When I say this please don't have your partner speak for the entirety or most of it. Just let the person actually ask the questions and then help them if they are really struggling. Run whatever floats your boat (that won't make you lose speaker points) and just be good. Don't be toxic in the debate round- you will lose speech points if it happens and that includes laughing silently or loudly at the other team.

+0.5 speaks: If you say a joke in your speech once. Multiple times of saying jokes won't increase your speaker points. You will still only get 0.5 speaks.

Hi there! I am Lexi Davis (she/her). I did six years of Lincoln Douglas debate at St. Croix Preparatory Academy in Stillwater, Minnesota, starting in seventh grade. I dipped my foot in policy and LD circuit, but most of my experience is in traditional MN local tournaments.

Add me to the email chain: lexid1avis@gmail.com

Preferences:

Speed - I can handle speed, but please slow down for tags and author names.

Please signpost!

Framework - this is super important in Lincoln-Douglas debate, as the winning framework is how I evaluate the round. Make sure you are linking back to framework throughout the round.

Disadvantages and Counterplans - Great!

Kritiks - I love Kritiks. I usually ran Ks on the circuit. Just ensure you thoroughly explain it to me.

Theory - I am willing to listen to theory calling out legitimate in-round abuse. I don’t buy disclosure theory; as someone who debated at a small school, I believe disclosure is net worse for small schools.

Topicality - I am willing to listen to T, but I don’t have as much experience with it. Run it at your own risk.

Tricks - I am not a tricks judge. Don’t run them in front of me.

Debate should be an inclusive, safe space where we can all learn and grow together. Please be kind and accessible to your opponent.

Have fun and good luck!

Hello! My name is Eleanor and my pronouns are she/her. I debated for Central and coached Hidden River. Currently I’m studying economics at UMN.

All of my judging experience is judging high school novice and middle school debates. Debate is a place for everyone to grow, and so I heavily prioritize creating a round where everyone can learn and have fun. If you are actively harming any of those areas your speaks will reflect it. This also means that you should run what you’re most comfortable with and make sure to explain it thoroughly.

Quality>Quantity

Clarity>Speed (I was on the slower end as a debater and won many rounds that way. I can flow nat cir debates, but it will be to your advantage to slow down)

Tech>Truth

Tag team is ok.

My hearing can be dubious at times so please minimize background noise by making sure your microphone is clear for online debate and limiting whispering during speeches. Additionally, please get verbal confirmation or a thumbs up with eye contact before you start your speech.

If I am knitting, crocheting, or fidgeting in some other way I am still listening, it just helps me sit still so I can pay attention. Don't feel shy about asking me what I'm knitting/crocheting! (But do focus on the round, not my knitting.)

If you need anything to make sure that the round is accessible to you, please say so before the round.

“PLEASE ACTUALLY LABEL YOUR FLOWS IN [THE] DOC AND IN SPEECH: I will dock points if you don't. [It’s] an accessibility issue and the minor time skew of clicking on the flow and coming up with a name isn't worth annoying your judge.” -Marshall Steele

I would love to be on the email chain: eleanordebate@gmail.com and stpaucentralcxdebate@gmail.com . For questions or concerns please email the eleanordebate address.

Central '19-'23

Macalester '27

Currently coaching for St. Paul Central, MN.

Hi! I’m Cayden, I use they/them pronouns, please use them! I’m generally quite a neutral judge however I think that making debate an inclusive and fun space outweighs all else.

I have bad hearing so please speak extra loud.This is mostly just that I struggle to hear a speaker if there are other noises going on so please be very quiet when speaking to your partner during a speech.

For email chains: stpaulcentralcxdebate@gmail.com

For questions/comments/concerns (i.e. anything not during a tournament): cayd3nhock3y12@gmail.com

Top Level: Please just run whatever you feel best running. I would rather have you run something I’m generally not partial to well than something I like badly. The best debates come from people running what they know best, so do that!

Some notes:

If your args have TW/CW, let me know before the round starts please, not before the speech. I also just generally am not a good judge for death/sexism/racism/etc. good. Your speaks will thank you for not reading those in front of me.

Judge Instruction:

I'm a big fan of judge instruction (who isn't?). I will figure it out if you don't tell me but I will be happier if you tell me :)

Spreading:

See hearing note at the top. Go fast if you want just be clear. I'm not someone who flows off the speech doc. Yes, card doc at the end.

In round non debate stuff:

I will not tolerate being explicitly rude in round. Be respectful, thats it.

T:

I am down for T however my standards on T impacts are higher than the avergae natcir and lower than localcir. I default to models but am also more likely to happily pull the trigger on in round abuse.

Ks:

I'm here for it. I've ran them on both sides and really like watching them. I'm also not someone who will pretend to know your k lit and i want to learn! so explain it to me! Not super huge fan of links of omission without very specific lit to back it. Down for most K args, not a fan of baudy or psycho but I'll judge em fairly, I just won't be the happiest camper.

PTX DAs:

I just want to PSA that i generally try to keep up with elections things happening IRL but sometimes fall behind so give me context for your uq claims.

Weird CPs:

Creative debate=good debate. I might fall behind on your techy strat with it but just give me like 15 secs of explination in an ovw and we are chilling.

K Affs:

I ran one, go crazy, love a good planless debate, love a good framework debate. Some of my favorite rounds have been performance style but also some of my least favorite have been bad K affs. I am probably not your best judge for a fairness bad round. Also, I have only ever heard one good death of debate argument and I think nearly all of the rest are not worth it in front of me.

FWK:I go through this first if its present and it will never be a "wash" for me. I default to a policy maker but also ran basically every fw under the sun so I am happy to be convinced otherwise. Please slow down on this once you get to the rebuttals and I love techy cross applications of other flows to fw.

Condo!:

Generally neutral? I don't super care and I will just vote on the tech tbh.

Also, unless the tournament rulebook specifies disclosure, please don't run disclosure theory in front of me, I believe that if you can win on disclosure theory, you can win on something else.

Anyways! feel free to ask me any questions you have before or after the round.

Nick Meyer – (He/Him) – njmeyer915@gmail.com Use the email above for any email chains during the round. Hi, I was an Eagan High School Debater 2019-2023, and I am currently a business major at the University of St. Thomas.

Logistics: I am new to the novice packet. I am good with speed, just slow down on analytics. I don’t have any problems with any arguments. Tag team is fine if you aren’t asking the questions for your partner.

Speaker Points:

If you’re racist, homophobic, transphobic, or sexist, you know the drill: I will give you the lowest number of speakers points I possibly can.

If you have any questions, you can email me at njmeyer915@gmail.com or speak to me in-person.