Hi! If you couldn't tell from the length of my paradigm I'm a d1 yapper. I don't expect you to read all of this. Read some of the bolded general stuff, scroll down to your event and read some of the bolded stuff there, and you read into any sections that you're specifically curious about. If you dont know what something means you can probably skip over it because 99% of the time it wont apply to you, and I promise im not going to judge you crazy hard lol. Low key the main reason this is so long is for the bit.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who am I?

Hi! You might have wondered who would actually write a research paper length paradigm for a silly extracurricular. I'm Sophie. I do debate because I actually enjoy it. If you could show an ounce of not hating this activity I would appreciate it. As for what i've done in this activity, I was a national qualifier in PF in 2024 and third in the district in LD, please interpret that as you will. I have also done 8 events, and have broken in 6 of them while only being a place away from breaking in the other two. Those events are DX, IX, LD, PF, CX, extemp debate, prose and Congress. I have competed in a debate tournament basically every week for the last 2 years during the school year. If you couldn't tell from the specificity I put in some events and not others, I for sure prefer debate over speech, but still enjoy both. I am also a junior right now.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General info:

The only thing I HATE about debate is how rude people get sometimes. I will always stand by the fact that it is almost impossible for me to side with/rank people who are disrespectful or rude. BE NICE. I hate clique-y and exclusionary behavior, and I think acting pretentious is cringe. Let yourself have some fun with your round, I promise im not gonna down you for it. If I think you were being rude I am not above giving you last/voting against you REGARDLESS of how well you were doing. Do not yell, do not belittle, don't scoff, or anything else that is generally disrespectful. It doesn't make me agree with you more. You can be aggressive without being rude.

If you bring spectators into the round, YOU are responsible for them. I suggest that you and your spectators read this next part very carefully if you plan to bring them in. If for any reason your spectator needs to leave, it HAS to be done during a natural break in the round. In traditional debate events, this is prep. For Congress this is recess or following a competitor out the door who called for a point of personal privilege. In speech, this is between speeches. If you have already left, please dont try to come back in unless you have friends who can tell you that it's a good time and open the door for you quietly. Please ask the people who are about to compete if spectators are okay. If they say no, I would appreciate you respect that. I wont ever down you for denying spectators. Competitors get to find their seats before spectators. Then, I prefer if spectators stay as far out of the line of sight of the competitors as possible (preferably you sit behind them). From this point on, I should barely be able to tell spectators are present. I reserve the right to bump down your speaks or even your rank in extreme cases if you bring in people who are disruptful. They should be totally silent the ENTIRE round, including prep time. They can get on their phones, but no computers please (to minimize cheating). If a spectator starts making someone uncomfortable, I encourage them to ask them to stop. I think spectating is a great thing but it shouldn't ever come at the expense of the people competing.

My policy on cheating? Pls dont. If I find out about cheating, I will report it to tab and talk to your coach, and neither of us wanna deal with that. I literally hate cheating. It's happened so many times in my rounds and there was nothing I could do about it. If you're texting, i'm going to assume it's about the round (and I generally dont like you using your phone for non-competitve reasons anyways....google snake exists guys and it's a lot more respectful). If you're citing evidence that makes a claim I dont buy, ill look it up. If you try to prep scum ill run your prep clock and not tell you about it until the next time you try to take prep.

I will disclose and or give a verbal RFD if you ask me to, but only if my ballot is already submitted. I am more than happy to answer questions, but please don't start arguing with me. That's not cool and also my ballot will already be submitted anyways. If i'm on a panel, I will disclose if the other members of the panel are willing to.

I usually like to let the round flow, but there are a few instances where, whether it be because I literally cant judge you effectively or because you're doing something I really REALLY hate, I stop evaluating. I will make it as OBVIOUS as possible if this happens. If I cant understand you, ill yell out clear. If you start running something like a cap K in PF or disclosure in LD, I will very loudly drop my pen until you stop before I begin flowing again. You will know why I stopped evaluating you because youll either get a verbal indication or you're the type of person to start spreading in PF and know for a fact you're being to tech-y. Please just try to fix the issue and ill resume whatever action shows you i'm paying attention after.

While I do try to time everything myself, PLEASE keep time for yourselves and your competitors. Try to start your timer on a stagger from the opponent's first word. If your opponent goes over, yell out “time!” if you're sure they're over. Im including IEs and congress cuz it's so rampant there lol. Do note that if MY timer says they still have time, ill let them continue and reimburse them the time. If youre doing extemp or an IE, I can time and do signals but if someone else could that would be sick.

Im a junior and thus ONLY judge novices. I wont down you for not following a perfect varsity standard. I will critique you based on your level. I will make sure your opponents arent doing anything crazy above your level. You should be using these years not only to learn but to have some fun in this activity.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PF specific stuff

Theres a reason why this is first- it's because I LOVEEEE PF. Out of all 8 events ive done, this is by far my fav.

General debate stuff:

Just a little rule of mine, you should be able to back up your cards with analysis on why they're true. If your only ability to explain your nuclear war impact is a card from 1969 that says that if roach populations increase by 1% then Russia is going to nuke the entire world with NO EXPLAINABLE REASONING behind it, I am totally going to buy it if your opponent says that because you can't explain it, it doesn't happen.This kind of just links to me wanting you to actually understand your reasoning. Not everything is about cards. It's okay to let go of the block files and actually DEBATE the other team with analysis. MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE FULL LINK CHAINS OF ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS!!

Please please PLEASEEEE try to stay consistent with your partner. I cant evaluate your arguments if you're operating on two entirely different keys.

You dont have to ask me to take prep but you do have to let me know when you start it, when you end it, and how much youve taken.

Heres how I rank the importance of things on my ballot, from most important to least

Weighing: This will go to how well your arguments develop through the round. Having a good impact will be the way to win this one. Please do not be afraid to weigh and call out specifically what the most important arguments in the round are and why. Unless your opponent attacks this and tells me to prioritize other arguments, if this goes conceded ill rank the importance of arguments in the order you told me to. Explain what my ballot should look like and why.

What I actually buy: This is about how your argument actually stands in the round. A solid link chain and good responses to opponents will win you this. I can buy any argument if it has a good link chain, but its not all about who can get the nuclear war impacts first as well. Make sure it makes sense, and spend time with extending it if you think its necessary for me to understand. If your opponent doesnt call out the fact that your link chain isnt believable, then I will probably still evaluate it.

Argumentation: This is more the general skill of both debaters. Being able to effectively respond and structure your speeches, as well as efficient use of time is how you get this one.

Respectfulness: I severely dislike disrespect in the debate space. Debate is fun if you let it be fun. Ive already gone into this earlier though. Just generally be nice to your opponent. In extreme cases, even if you” win” the round, if you're not respectful you're getting a loss. Be nice.

Speaks stuff

I will give out speaker points starting at a 28.

To raise speaks) Effective use of time, respectfulness, being clear, having good link chains, effectively responding to arguments, good weighing, and good etiquette are all good ways to raise your speaks

To lower speaks) Basically the opposite of the raising speaks. Being disrespectful is almost an automatic 26 or 25.

Specific round stuff (quick to read so you might wanna)

The second rebuttal responds to the opponent's case and also the first rebuttal. If they don't, then the first speakers have every right to claim their responses as dropped.

If you're doing the coin flip the other side calls. You need to flip where the other side can see it clearly. I prefer you flip in front of me, but if not its okay. Im also okay with holding the flip. I also prefer you flip via google or Siri rather than a physical coin.

Please be respectful in grand cross. I know its easy to get carried away, but, if you're able to control it that reflects positively on you as a speaker. Feel free to gentle parent the other team because I do that too lol. Just dont be bellittling.

First speaker gets first questioning priority unless they dont want it.

Extensions are okay but not really necessary for me. I've already heard your case. If you have a confusing link chain and want to use it to clarify thats fine.

Cross is listened to but will not count unless its brought up in your speeches that come immediately after.

60% argumentation 30% speaking

The best type of cases follow a uniqueness solvency and impact format.

If you sneak a Chappell Roan reference in there somewhere ill give you an extra 0.1 speaking point. If its an obscure reference ill give you +0.2

Topic specific

I have had a decent amount of exposure to the topic, so I'm pretty familiar with the background of it and also some of the technicalities of it. You probably wont have to waste time explaining things like semiconductors to me, but still tell me why they're important (basically just have clear impacting. I know why theyre important, but I'd like to hear that from you.)

If you're one of those and youre trying to do something not standard (most can skip)

In terms of what I allow in round, it totally depends on what your opponents are okay with. As long as your opponents clear you on things like talking fast or using a lot of jargon, then im cool with it too. There are a few exceptions to this rule.

Spreading:Yeah no spreading please. I have done policy before, so I know that talking fast isnt inherently spreading. You can talk fast if your opponent is okay with it. I classify spreading as anything that requires a speech doc to understand. That being said, in PF I will NOT hop on any speech drops/ email chains. Yall feel free to set those things up between each other though.

Progressive argumentation (like K's):I've done enough policy to know it when I see it, and I am not going to evaluate it if I do. Please for the love of god stay mostly topical. Progressive arguments are not arguments that lean left by the way, they're a specific brand of debate specific arguments and if you don't know what im talking about skip over this. Progressive argumentation is the reason why traditional debate events are dying, because novices genuinely cannot keep up with them. No K’s, counterplans, or anything that might at all strike you as an argument that doesn't relate to the topic directly. If you start talking about a communist revolution I will literally explode.

Theory: Girl im not gonna vote for you because the other team didnt give you all of their arguments before round. That destroys clash. I am also not going to vote for you because the other team didnt read out the qualifications of their authors or some other random thing that isnt standard. If you even try to read one of these not only is my pen going down but i'm submitting my ballot for the other side, closing my computer, and taking a nap.

Voting for “changing the debate space”: Unless you can actually prove solvency for your argument and how this round SPECIFICALLY will have a meaningful impact on the debate space ill literally submit a ballot for the other side and take a nap (and no, submitting a ballot that "shows tab the importance of the issue" despite the fact tab literally doesn't even read rfd's doesn't count). There's a difference between genuinely wanting to spread awareness and using it to win without caring about improving the issue, and I find these arguments do not really care about actually creating change.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LD specific stuff

I have only ever competed in one LD tournament, but that tournament did get me into regionals for LD. That said, you can probably assume I'm familiar with HOW to debate and clash everything, but I probably won't remember some of the structural things like timing on my own.

General debate stuff:

Just a little rule of mine, you should be able to back up your cards with analysis on why they're true. If your only ability to explain your nuclear war impact is a card from 1969 that says that if roach populations increase by 1% then Russia is going to nuke the entire world with NO EXPLAINABLE REASONING behind it, I am totally going to buy it if your opponent says that because you can't explain it, it doesn't happen. This kind of just links to me wanting you to actually understand your reasoning. Not everything is about cards. It's okay to let go of the block files and actually DEBATE the other team with analysis. MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE FULL LINK CHAINS OF ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS!!

You dont have to ask me to take prep but you do have to let me know when you start it, when you end it, and how much youve taken.

Heres the order of significance I use as a guideline to judge.

Weighing: This will go to how well your arguments develop through the round. Having a good impact will be the way to win this one. Please do not be afraid to weigh and call out specifically what the most important arguments in the round are. Unless your opponent attacks this and tells me to prioritize other arguments, if this goes conceded ill rank the importance of arguments in the order you told me to. Explain what my ballot should look like and why.

What I actually buy: This is about how your argument actually stands in the round. A solid link chain and good responses to opponents will win you this. I can buy any argument if it has a good link chain, but its not all about who can get the nuclear war impacts first as well. Make sure it makes sense, and spend time with extending if you think its necessary for me to understand. If your opponent doesnt call out the fact that your link chain isnt believable, then I will probably still evaluate it.

Argumentation: This is more the general skill of both debaters. Being able to effectively respond and structure your speeches, as well as efficient use of time is how you get this one.

Respectfulness: I severely dislike disrespect in the debate space. Debate is fun if you let it be fun. Ive already gone into this earlier though. Just generally be nice to your opponent. In extreme cases, even if you” win” the round, if you're not respectful you're getting a loss. Be nice.

Speaks stuff

I will give out speaker points starting at a 28.

To raise speaks) Effective use of time, respectfulness, being clear, having good link chains, effectively responding to arguments, good weighing, and good etiquette are all good ways to raise your speaks

To lower speaks) Basically the opposite of the raising speaks. Being disrespectful is almost an automatic 26 or 25.

Specific round stuff (quick to read so you might wanna)

Value debate kind of defines everything for me. I will weigh arguments under whatever fw I buy the most. Clash under frameworks matters a lot, but don't be afraid to concede your opponents fw or weigh your arguments under both.

I really dont mind skipping cross if you dont know what to ask. It doesnt reflect poorly on you as a speaker.

LD is values based. Unless you're spreading, I wanna see some conviction in your voice.

If your value or value criteria is something obscure, define it. Like girl idk what pragmatism means and I am not looking it up.

Respect in this event is EXTREMELY important since it's just two of yall.

Speech 30% content 70%

If you sneak a Chappell Roan reference in there somewhere ill give you an extra 0.1 speaking point. If its an obscure reference ill give you +0.2

Topic specifics

I have not debated, prepped cases, or even researched the topic that much. Assume unless something is super baseline that I dont know about it. Because I feel like it's important to be transparent: I have been an advocate of a wealth for a few years. However, I like to believe that in a debate context im usually pretty good at negating my personal bias when I need to.

If you're one of those and youre trying to do something not standard (most can skip)

In terms of what I allow in round, it totally depends on what your opponents are okay with. As long as your opponents clear you on things like talking fast or using a lot of jargon, then im cool with it too. There are a few things that I want to specifically address because whether or not I want to admit it, LD is more mixed with policy then I might want it to be.

Spreading: Spreading is something that I will ONLY allow if both sides THOROUGHLY understand what it is and have come into contact with it before. I want your opponent to understand exactly what it is they're signing up for. I will have the final say in whether or not I think spreading is allowed, even if your opponent says it's okay. IF you are allowed to, then make sure that if you're doing analysis you slow down at those points/ include it in the doc. Also please try to be quick with your doc shares, if you start trying to get extra prep in while you're “sharing” im gonna run your prep clock until the document is sent, and you wont know that until the next time you take prep. I prefer speech drop, but if we must do an email chain for whatever reason, add be on at sophie.contaldi@gmail.com

Progressive argumentation: Very similar stipulations to spreading. Your opp needs to really KNOW what they're getting themselves into. If you both agree on it and I approve it, then you need to make sure I understand everything you're running. If you're running anything especially nuts, please spend time explaining it to me. If I dont understand it I just wont evaluate it. Also you get 4 off (including case) before I put my head down and drop my pen, so be very intentional with what you decide to run.

Theory: Girl im not gonna vote for you because the other team didnt give you all of their arguments before round. That destroys clash. I am also not going to vote for you because the other team didnt read out the qualifications of their authors or some other random thing that isnt standard. If you even try to read one of these not only is my pen going down but im submitting my ballot for the other side, closing my computer, and taking a nap.

Voting for “changing the debate space”: Unless you can actually prove solvency for your argument and how this round SPECIFICALLY will have a meaningful impact on the debate space ill literally submit a ballot for the other side and take a nap (and no, submitting a ballot that "shows tab the importance of the issue" despite the fact tab literally doesn't even read rfd's doesn't count). There's a difference between genuinely wanting to spread awareness and using it to win without caring about improving the issue.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extemp specific stuff

Extemp is something I enjoy because I like yapping. It's also a lot simpler then debate so this section is probably gonna move by a little fast.

Give me your topic slip whenever you enter the room. If im in a panel read the topic out and give it to one of us. If you dont then ill have to go talk to tab to make sure your topic actually existed and thats a whole thing that neither of us wanna deal with.

Try to state the topic verbatim but im not gonna crucify you if you dont. Especially if your topic is like 2 sentences long.

Try to answer the ENTIRE question in your responses.

If your topic isnt something super-duper obvious please give me some background. Im gonna be so for real, im a little uninformed with more obscure news stuff lol.

3 reasons, and please make sure to clearly illustrate where you are in your speech via signposting and using the speakers triangle

I like silly AGD's and I dont care if theyre canned. Dont feel pressured though, if you cant think of one then background works just fine.

Dont let fluency breaks throw you off. Im not going to sit here and tally them or anything. If you get tripped up, restart your sentence. If you forget what you're saying, pause for a second. Im not gonna crucify you for it.

3-6 sources, but I heavily prefer 6. AT least 1 per reason, but 2 per reason is better.

I like the structure of explaining your point and then explaining how it connects back to your prompt and/or the impact of it.

Make sure you relate each point back to the topic CLEARLY. They should all be answers to your topic, not background or something that isnt an answer.

I'm more left leaning, but I will buy anything as long as the linkchain is reasonable and it's not discriminatory. Basically, you dont have to try to gamble to make your speech support my political views. Just be respectful and avoid extremely sensitive topics when you can.

As for time signals, I will do my best but sometimes I get too lost in the speech. If you bring in spectators who can give signals for me that would be sick.If not I got it, but id prefer you just use the standard 3 down first at grace.

If you want to gear a specific part of your speech towards me more, I really like Chappell Roan and would think it was hilarious if you brought her up. I dont care if the reference is obscure.

I believe it's important to explain how I rank speakers, so here's my system: The first speaker automatically receives a ranking of 1. When the second speaker presents, they start with a 2. If I think they performed better than the first speaker, I'll move them up to the 1 position. The third speaker starts with a 3. If they perform better than the person ranked at 2, they can swap places—and this swapping continues as needed based on each speaker's performance. I will continue this pattern until everyone has spoken, swapping out speakers accordingly. I find this approach to be the fairest because it ensures that earlier speakers aren't overlooked, even after a long session.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congress:

Congress is real debate. You actually have to debate if you want to do well. I wil have 2 parts of this, 1 for PO’s and one for actual competitors. You only have to read the part that correlates with you.

PO rules

Hi! If you're planning to PO, read this VERY carefully. Im not gonna bold any parts of this because you should be reading all of it anyways. The only exception is if youre POing because nobody else would. You are almost guaranteed to break/do well if that is the case and I wont be so stingy.

My personal opinion is that it should be the job of the parli to PO, NOT the competitors. I do not think it is at all fair to evaluate someone who reads a spreadsheet and bangs a gavel above people who not only prepared speeches, but actually got up and gave them and then responded to questions about it. Be aware that unless you are PO because literally nobody else would, you have to actually try and do well at it to get ranked. You're not getting an automatic break. I will give you the 9 as a PO if I feel like you deserve it. You're only going to break if you are exceptional at POing, and even then, the highest ill give you is a 3. That being said, heres a few standards to follow: Please read the legislation to me unless I specifically ask you not to. Sometimes I am not already educated about what the legislation actually is. During recess, if I ask you to explain a bill, you should be able to do that. ESPECIALLY if we are in prelims.

Go over gavelling procedures before the round begins, even if it's on your spreadsheet. If you need to randomize names bring your computer over to me while you do it so I can make sure it's actually random I dont mind skipping unneccesary formalities (ex: docket nomination when theres a set docket)

You should have near perfect speed and correctness if you want to break to finals. Keep the chamber in order but dont be petty/rude. It's obvious when you're repeating rules to keep the chamber in order and whenever you're repeating the obvious to be petty, ESPECIALLY if they offense was clearly a mistake and not them actually not knowing about the rules.

Unless for some reason you ABSOLUTELY have to PO on paper, PO online. I hate paper PO. If the wifi is out and you have to paper PO, then you have to sit next to me so I can look over it. Your competitiors are also allowed to look at it any time in the round as long as there isnt a speech going on. If your chamber doesnt call you out for mistakes, I will if I notice them. Also if someone is trying to tell you that you messed up on something that you noticed later then dont talk over them to say "oh yeah I noticed." before they can tell you what you did. That doesnt make you look better to me, it just irritates everyone in the round. I will welcome the competitors to call you out for mistakes you made a few cycles back, but you dont have to fix them if itll take a bunch of time. You can make mistakes and still break, so dont just give up.

You’re also not always ready. Give an indication each time because sometimes POs say theyre always ready and they definently arent. If youre not ready I wont down you for saying it unless it gets excessive. If I find out you said you were ready when you werent you're getting the 9.

Remind me every hour to mark you as a speaker. If you dont then youre probably not going to rank very high, and if you do every hour you missed is automatically going to go in as 1 point.

Also don't slam your gavel unless you absolutely have to get the chambers/ speakers attention, not only is it distracting but it gets annoying. You can just tap it. You need to call for authors, sponsors, and then first affs in that order. Too many PO’s try to skip some of those.

I also appreciate it whenever a PO shows that theyre engaged in round like saying "I guess we'll never know if xyz" when questioning elapses. Try to be at least a little aware of what is happenining during round.

If you're on your phone for anything other than using it to help you PO or during a recess you're getting the 9.

Again, you can still make mistakes and break. If you know how many breaks there are please let me know that too. I don't like POs but I understand it is a necessary evil.

Actual competitor guidelines

General stuff

Be respectful. This is not the set of mean girls, and I am not above giving someone who could've been a first place speaker the 9 because they were being rude. As someone who has competed in almost every event, this is where people get THE MEANEST and I HATE that.

Try to keep it down. Dont scream over everyone to try to get your point across. You do not run the chamber, and youll find out pretty early into reading my paradigm that trying to run the chamber by forcing other people to be quiet is a huge pet peeve of mine.

Kind of related to the last one, please dont be rude to compete for attention. Like if someone wants to run splits and you take the marker from them, that makes me notice you sure but its not in a favorable way. Dont yell over everyone to get your opinion out first. I also hate the whole "lets let people who spoke this number of times/ this recent speak first!" Precedence is there for a reason. If they want to speak, they can stand. If somebody gets disadvantaged by precedence ill notice it. Dont make the whole round Awkard and janky. You're a competitor, not a babysitter. Dont take it upon yourself to run the entire chamber by yourself if other people are trying to be active too.

It's not always about trying to get out of round as quickly as possible. Dont cut people who still have speeches they want to give off at mid cycle because youve already given your speech and you dont care anymore. I actually love debate, so at the very least just PRETEND you want to be there. Also, each person should get at least the chance of two speeches. If that doesnt happen youre probably gonna get called back into round by tab and nobody wants to deal with that.

Tell me your name TWICE in your walk up. Then just face your placard towards your opponents so clash is easier.

I pay attention to precedence, and I can tell if you're getting screwed by it. I will adjust my rankings accordingly if that's the case. If youre standing up and not getting to speak until last, ill notice it. I will tend to rank people who speak sooner above those who speak later (unless the reason you weren't speaking was precedence based). I think people who prep deserve higher ranks then people who read the legislation when theyre in the room.

I will be for real, its hard to stay focused the whole 3 hours. Please try to stay engaging. I prefer humor in speeches but seriousness also works. Make any pop culture references you want. Just try to be unique.

I am not always ready so ask for an indication. Get creative with how you ask for it, I dont really mind.

If the PO made a mistake a few questions/speeches ago still call it out even if you noticed it later/ there's nothing they can do to fix it.

50/50 on speech and content.

If I have trouble buying the link chain of your evidence, ill look your evidence up. If I dont find it then im gonna report it to tab. Your opponents do not have time to look up everybodys sources, so they're trusting you to be honest. Please dont fake evidence. Thats a headache neither of us wanna deal with.

Make a Chappell roan reference and ill give you 1 extra point on your speech. It will not affect my rankings in any way and its only valid for 1 speech, but I think its funny.

How I rate different types of speeches

Sponsor/Author: When you give one of these speeches, the bill automatically “becomes” YOUR bill. You should be reoccuring throughout the round. Your speech should have argumentation, but it should also do a good job at explaining what the bill actually is. Tell me why your bill is necessary, tell me what it solves, and how it solves it. I should be learning the majority of what ill hear about the bill from you. I should know exactly what the bill says without even reading it following your speech. A sponsor/author should look very different from a first aff. Youre introducing it and setting the grounds for the aff arguments to follow.

First neg: You're going to be setting up the neg for the rest of the debate. Clash direcly with the first aff, and explain why either the bill doesnt solve or why the world would be negatively impacted upon passage.

First half of aff or neg speakers: You can bring up new arguments, but at this point, you should be responding to and clashing with other speakers. However, I prefer no clash as opposed to rehash. This means that if your side already responded to an argument and you have no way to add onto that constructively, just skip it. If you're talking about similar arguments to speakers who came up prior to you, either put a different spin on them, add onto what the other speaker said constructively, or otherwise just dont read the argument as well. A shorter speech time will look better to me than straight up repitition by far.

Midrounder: Girl if you can pull off an effective midrounder ill give you the 1. I have only seen 1 good midrounder speech, and it was by the person who won nationals, toc, and a bunch of college tournaments. I also dont need to see a midrounder in a round just because it's super complex. In basic terms, a midrounder changes what the debate is about. It's like “we have seen these issues but we have missed a much bigger issue.” I dont even know how to explain how to do it because not even im at that level lol.

Clash rebuttals: Please try to bring something constructive to the debate. Probably no new arguments at this point (unless you got bad precedence and thats why you're giving a speech here), but build on old ones and start establishing why your ballot gets secured in the aff/neg. Think of your side like a team. Youre trying to use what everyone else has been doing to score a point for them,

Crystal: The majority of people who crystal read the bills for the first time in the room. Thus, crystals are going to be judged very harshly. You need to talk about all of the key points in the round on BOTH sides, weigh, and explain why your side wins. Like the last speech in CX LD or PF.

How I evaluate questioning:

Responding to questions: I will score your speech on a x.5 scale (so like a 1.5-5.5). I will bump that score up or down depending on how well I think you handle questioning. If you handle questioning badly or mediocracy, youll get rounded down. If you handle it well or really well, ill bump you up.

Asking questions: Whenever you ask a question, ill put a mark next to your name that'll get factored into my ballot. Whatever mark I put next to your name is based on the quality of your questioning.

If it was a low-quality question/not even really a question/ didnt contribute to any argument, I will but a minus sign next to your name.

If it was an okay question, itll be a squiggly mark.

If you ask a question that helps your side a bunch, sets up a really good argument, or generally just seems really good ill give you a checkmark.

At the end, ill score how many points I gave you on speeches and how many points you got from questioning, and ill rank you according to that. Basically I have a system that makes sure questioning gets evaluated on my ballot so ask good questions.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CX specific stuff

I like policy because its unique lol. Debating it is low key a little freeing.

General debate stuff:

In terms of what I allow in round, since it's policy I think basically anything goes. Spreading, progressive args, whatever you want, Go off. Heres a few things to note tho

Spreading: I prefer speech drop, but if we must do an email chain for whatever reason, add be on at sophie.contaldi@gmail.com

Theory: Girl im not gonna vote for you because the other team didnt give you all of their arguments before round UNLESSSS what they're running is mad obscure and doesnt link to many common off. That destroys clash. I am also not going to vote for you because the other team didnt read out the qualifications of their authors or some other random thing that isnt standard. If you even try to read one of these not only is my pen going down but im submitting my ballot for the other side, closing my computer, and taking a nap.

Voting for “changing the debate space”: Unless you can actually prove solvency for your argument and how this round SPECIFICALLY will have a meaningful impact on the debate space ill literally submit a ballot for the other side and take a nap (and no, submitting a ballot that "shows tab the importance of the issue" despite the fact tab literally doesn't even read rfd's doesn't count). There's a difference between genuinely wanting to spread awareness and using it to win without caring about improving the issue, and I find these arguments do not really care about actually creating change.

Just a little rule of mine, you should be able to back up your cards with analysis on why they're true. If your only ability to explain your nuclear war impact is a card from 1969 that says that if roach populations increase by 1% then Russia is going to nuke the entire world with NO EXPLAINABLE REASONING behind it, I am totally going to buy it if your opponent says that because you can't explain it, it doesn't happen.This kind of just links to me wanting you to actually understand your reasoning. Not everything is about cards. It's okay to let go of the block files and actually DEBATE the other team with analysis. MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE FULL LINK CHAINS OF ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS!!

Please please PLEASEEEE try to stay consistent with your partner. I cant evaluate your arguments if you're operating on two entirely different keys.

You dont have to ask me to take prep but you do have to let me know when you start it, when you end it, and how much youve taken.

Heres the order of significance I use as a guideline to judge.

Weighing: This will go to how well your arguments develop through the round. Having a good impact will be the way to win this one. Please do not be afraid to weigh and call out specifically what the most important arguments in the round are. Unless your opponent attacks this and tells me to prioritize other arguments, if this goes conceded ill rank the importance of arguments in the order you told me to. Explain what my ballot should look like and why.

What I actually buy: This is about how your argument actually stands in the round. A solid link chain and good responses to opponents will win you this. I can buy any argument if it has a good link chain, but its not all about who can get the nuclear war impacts first as well. Make sure it makes sense, and spend time with extending if you think its necessary for me to understand. If your opponent doesnt call out the fact that your link chain isnt believable, then I will probably still evaluate it.

Argumentation: This is more the general skill of both debaters. Being able to effectively respond and structure your speeches, as well as efficient use of time is how you get this one.

Respectfulness: I severely dislike disrespect in the debate space. Debate is fun if you let it be fun. Ive already gone into this earlier though. Just generally be nice to your opponent. In extreme cases, even if you” win” the round, if you're not respectful you're getting a loss. Be nice.

Speaks stuff

I will give out speaker points starting at a 28.

To raise speaks) Effective use of time, respectfulness, being clear, having good link chains, effectively responding to arguments, good weighing, and good etiquette are all good ways to raise your speaks

To lower speaks) Basically the opposite of the raising speaks. Being disrespectful is almost an automatic 26 or 25.

More specific stuff (I recommend reading all of these).

I will evaluate basically any argument as long as it either links to the case very clearly or links to the controllable actions of the other team. Wanna tell me death is good? Go ahead. As long as you can debate it, I dont care. My only restrictions are the obvious not being discriminatory. This is policy, it's like the wild west of debate here queen.

K aff's are fun but have to be disclosed

I dont buy disclosure. As long as the opponents have a case that can reasonably link to some basic off then youre never gonna win on disclosure. You can make analysis based on case arguments, and I think that analysis is majorly underrated. If the opp has something like crazy obscure you can run it.

If youre spreading either slow down at analysis points or put analysis in your docs.

If youre running anything especially complex please make sure to explain it clearly to me in your speeches (like maybe spend more time on overviews/extending)

If youre going fast to the point I cant even keep up with the doc ill yell our clear

Run a reasonable amount of off. I am only going to count the first 5 (including case). If you go passed that you're getting a dramatic pen drop and im going to put my head down for the rest of your speech. Choose carefully what you wanna run because im not gonna be evaluating excessive off just so you can stress out the aff.

Reasonability is also everything. If you say poverty causes nuke war you better be ready to explain why. If the opp says "they have no link to poverty causing nuke war" even if you say "I have a card" as long as you can't explain your impacts im not voting for you on it.

If youre reading cards then put them in the doc

No new cards pass the first half of the neg block pleaseeee.

If you sneak a Chappell Roan reference in there somewhere ill give you an extra 0.1 speaking point. If its an obscure reference ill give you +0.2

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Informative IE specific stuff:

I think how you chose to inform and engage me is crucial. Especially with the prep you have. Make it creative!!

30 precent how interesting your topic is, and 70 precent how well you delivered it/established your arguments.

I love love love creative topics/ creative spins on common topics n stuff. Commentaries on social issues are pretty sick, but I like whenever speeches commentate on more niche social issues that don't get covered a lot. Type of stuff you could watch a video essay on.

Make sure its well-structured and generally engaging and informative. I like whenever you incorporate creative elements into your structure,

While I can give time signals, if someone else in the room could that would be sick.

I believe it's important to explain how I rank speakers, so here's my system: The first speaker automatically receives a ranking of 1. When the second speaker presents, they start with a 2. If I think they performed better than the first speaker, I'll move them up to the 1 position. The third speaker starts with a 3. If they perform better than the person ranked at 2, they can swap places—and this swapping continues as needed based on each speaker's performance. I will continue this pattern until everyone has spoken, swapping out speakers accordingly. I find this approach to be the fairest because it ensures that earlier speakers aren't overlooked, even after a long session.

This is the only type of event that, though I have spectated it before, I have never done. I will be the least familiar with the structure here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Acting IE specific stuff:

If you have a book that youre allowed to read off of, ill always rank someone who didnt read off of it often and maybe stumbled a bit over someone who read from it. Dont feel discouraged if you think you might forget parts of your piece! I wont dock you if you flip through real quick to find your spot and then continue or if you stumble a bit.

Also if you have a book, feel free to use it as a prop. This kind of goes for any materials you're allowed to have, whether its a book or a whole other person or whatever it is you're working with.

I like to see differentiation between different characters. Give everyone their own personality and character! Its your job to bring the piece to life! I dont even care about logistical consistency. Want your character's parents, who were born and live in Germany, to have southern and british accents? Sure. Just bring it to life!

Please dont be afraid to get expressive. You can jump around the room, be loud, whatever. Just try to have some flow and reason. But the speaking space/ anything you might have with you is yours to use in your interpretation of your piece

I dont like shock humor. Especially in like HI kind of stuff, if you have some weird jokes in there, maybe skip over them.

While I can give time signals, if someone else in the room could do that for me that would be sick.

I believe it's important to explain how I rank speakers, so here's my system: The first speaker automatically receives a ranking of 1. When the second speaker presents, they start with a 2. If I think they performed better than the first speaker, I'll move them up to the 1 position. The third speaker starts with a 3. If they perform better than the person ranked at 2, they can swap places—and this swapping continues as needed based on each speaker's performance. I will continue this pattern until everyone has spoken, swapping out speakers accordingly. I find this approach to be the fairest because it ensures that earlier speakers aren't overlooked, even after a long session.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Event not listed

Girl if your event isnt listed then we are both going to be very confused. Ill try to give a verbal paradigm if you ask me but chances are I know basically zero about your event (cough cough world schools) and that ive never debated or spectated it before (cough cough world schools). If you're not listed, you're probably in world schools. Girl ive tried to understand worlds and it makes my head hurt and makes me feel tired.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overall: Just have fun with it. I only judge novices and so please dont be afraid to ask me questions, ill never vote you down for it. Debate is supposed to be a really fun activity, so dont stress over it and just generally let yourself have fun.

My name is CK or Chanakya Khanna.

Don't call me judge, I'm not old. Call me CK

I have been debating for more than a year now and I have competed in PF, Extemp, Impromptu, and currently LD.

I'd love for you to say "its game over" in round for you opponent. BRING ME A COKE PLEASEEEEE???

!!!!SPEECH ALERT!!!!!!!-

I also judge speech, but I'm more of a debate person so yea.

ALL DEBATES-

-explain why dropped/conceded items are important (my opponent failed to respond _ arg proving why _ is true...)

-if new args are brought up (in last speech) just say so it won't offend me (points will be docked if a significant amount of new arguments are presented last speech)

LD

IMP- DONT DROP CONTENTIONSSSS OR IMPACTSSS

I need warranted responses

I'm a trad judge,

I prefer no spreading just because I need to flow your round so I can give proper constructive feedback. If I can't understand you then you have a high chance to loose my ballot.

I need to know why your value/criteria is better than your opponents.

Although I do prefer a battle of frameworks, I would also like opponents to outweigh each other.-------------> Key to winning my ballot

FW debate is not a cop out for me so dont JUST focus on it. Focus on providing warranted responses to opps arguments.

PF

IMP- DONT DROP CONTENTIONSSSS OR IMPACTSSS

I need warranted responses

Need to provide sufficient evidence for all claims and outweighing is key to winning my ballot. Do not spread because this is a very statistical debate and it is important for me and your opponent to hear every part of your constructive speech etc.

Policy

I'ma be honest, I don't know much about this event but I will do my best to making a fair ballot and give good constructive feedback.

GOOD LUCK!!!!