Policy debater at Bellarmine

Ryan Mills Note: I understand the basics of LD, just debate as you normally would

Also, my views are firmly aligned with Andrew Wen

Extemp:

y'all know what to do. Prioritize delivery > content for now. However, if you have exceptional content, that will be recognized.

CX Paradigm:

***Full disclosure: I'm not in Policy anymore...I'm not too familiar with the new resolution, so make sure to def acronyms/shortened phrases in your constructives so I can follow.

I'll be judging Rhetoric like a normal lay judge because that's who you'll have for the rest of the year. Have a consistent story throughout all ur speeches. Also, make sure to clearly extend args. Don't make the flow too cluttered. Whoever has clearer args + weighed better wins obv.

Be kind.

For debate, please refer to Derek Qian's paradigm

For speech, please refer to Derek Qian's paradigm

hello,

1. i dont hate you

2. my last statement is lying to you

3. my second statement is lying to you

4. you already hate my paradigm

im joking

or am i

i'm not kidding

but i am kidding

or am i

abt me:

junior - public forum(JOIN PF, we meet Tuesdays L-209)

i did policy for freshman year + half of sophomore year

topicality demon

i accept bribes, junk food is fine too

any harry potter, suits, or the office reference(+0.1 points)

any niners or warriors reference(+0.3 points)

good food/snacks (+0.5 points) - i can clarify whats considered "good" before round <-- for fairness reasons this is a joke, or is it......

Rhetoric:

SUPER SUPER top line stuff

- be nice, no rude remarks, bad stuff, any disrespect to me or the other judge

Pet peeve:i hate it when people LIE in the debate - like if they didn't drop smthn and u stand up and say they did imma call cap real quick on my flow

- literally just warrant stuff out and TELL me WHY and HOW for everything

have fun!

SEMI TOP LEVEL STUFF

- i'm usually like really frickin expressive so you can tell if i like or dislike an argument based on my reaction to how ur saying it - if i look confused/lost that means i have no idea what u just said.

-be nice to ur opponents

- anything that ends with -ist or -phobic in relation to social harm and you'll see just how much i'll do...

-no scoffs, bad looks, side eyes, mean stuff

- be nice to me as well or auto loss w/ bad score i don't mind giving u a bad grade if u don't have some respect

- treat me like a parent - not a high schooler, but if i joke w u thats my own prerogative

- if i see u on ur phone AND ur NOT timing lowest score i can give u - Mr.Liu said it was fine

- just don't be a douche

- enough with the nice stuff now

- warrant stuff out i don't wanna hear claims for an hour and half straight

- defense is NOT sticky you need to extend responses throughout the debate cant just say they didn't respond to it and call it a day

- please please please please please do not make me figure out where on the flow you are make sure u signpost

- if its round 3-4 i'm gonna be tired so you please have some energy to wake me up

- make sure that u flush out arguments that u want to be in the 2NR/2AR really well - this can take place in o/vs

- o/vs need to be good and u need to make them contextualize the debate

-just have a good round and don't make it bad

- i'm gonna say this again SIGNPOST PLEASE

- extend extend extend with card author names PLEASE if u don't remembewr at least extend the warranting

- this is more pf ish but u need to weigh

- the 2NR/2AR NEEDS to clarify the debate for me - bring it down to a few issues and tell me why u win

- no i don't disclose unless i'm told to

ASSUME i hAVE ZERO TOPIC KNOWLEDE

ASK ME BEFORE ROUND IF U HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ARGUMENT SPEC STUFF (harms, solvency, disad, topicality).

RHETORIC IGNORE WHATEVER IS BELOW THIS

TLDR

put me on the email chain - bankanakul@gmail.com

i'm usually nice

i usually give a lot of feedback

1. any arg is fine - if it's something not conventionally run on the topic explain it well

2. defense is sticky

3. stuff in ff should be in summary

4. collapse in summaries

5. don't drop arguments (at least the big ones)

6. have fun i guess?

7. if i think ur too rude i'll stop flowing all ur speeches and then evaluate the debate

8. i'm really frickin expressive so if i look confused i am if i start nodding i like what ur saying probably bc i say it in debate woohoo

"steal prep and I'll steal your speaks" - Eli Glickman

tech > truth (i will do my best to not screw you)\

weird stuff - consider absolutely none of this except tech > truth if u are novice

but basically, think of every based judge you've evver seen, that's me

tech ---x------truth ( but at the same time i will call cap)

being chill --x-------being stingy ( i will be stingy in the ballot don't be stingy in round it pisses me off)

K----------x--substance (if ur reading a K, a generic will be ok for you, but a non generic K will be bad for you)

K-Affs--------x-substance ( i hate all K-affs)

Theory--x-------"I don't know how to respond"

Clarity -x------Speed

Spreading --------x----Not spreading

im ok with talking a lil fast that aint a problem

Theory:

i like theory, when its debated well

i hate it when its debated bad

i will reward both sides in a debate if both teams debate it well

dropped theory shell with an impact means no path to ballot for team that dropped it ( as long as i think the theory is valid)

friv theory is ok, but sketchy. like no clothing theory please.

hack for disclo, paraphrasing is bad IN FAST, if its elims with mix panel and more lay than flow - paraphrasing is fine

don't forget to attach an impact to the back (reason to reject the team) - i did this once so...

K

1. i know how it works but i don't like it
2. best way to get my ballot is to NOT run it

TKO

if u know what it is do it, if you don't know what it is don't do it.

(u can ask me before round what it is)

last notes:

be nice and respectful

weigh

dont lie

dont overthink things n just debate

ask if any questions

not-so-fun-facts abt me:

past=cx 1 yr (lay+fast), parli 1 yr (???)

now=ld 2yrs (lay)

mustard is goated

debate paradigm:

i main speech, so im prob more confused than u are on why im judging ur rnd

treat me like a parent judge (lwk in a midlife crisis) who’s had kids do debate for the past 5 years (tl;dr: ik basic fast, tech>truth kinda, etc., but why would u want to ruin the day)

CLASHCLASHCLASH PLEASE HAVE CLASH

don't give up until the last speech, i'm always listening

Go slow and be clear. Don’t be rude or super uptight, especially in cross.

Make sure you weigh and tell me clearly which VIs/Stock Issues are winning you the debate.

Have fun!

I'm open to bribes.

Please give me flow paper if you have it.

I did policy for 1.5 years and am now doing PF. Thus, while I know about the 5 stock issues and how to judge this round, I have no idea what the current topic is besides that it has something to do with patents and is wildly complicated. Please define EVERYTHING -- I can't really vote on an argument like injunctions if idk what an injunction is. Define and explain every topic-specific term as much as possible.

The negative team only needs to win 1 stock issue to win the debate -- therefore, just extend 1 or 2 into the 2NR (you don't need to overstretch yourself by extending all 4). On the disadvantage though, the negative doesn't win just by saying the plan leads to this one small consequence so we win the stock issue -- you have to impact it out so that it severely competes with the aff harms. On the other hand, the aff can't cop out of responding to the DA by just saying "our harms outweigh" -- actually debate it out.

Please do some sort of impact comparison between the affirmative and negative -- 2-worlds framing is pretty good at this but frame the round big-picture stuff -- explain how you winning the LBL on 1 argument translates to you winning the stock issue.

If there's a piece of evidence that both teams argue abt during the round, I might just call for it.

How to get a good grade:

SPEAK LOUDLY PLEASE AND DON'T MUMBLE

1. Have different OVs for every speech -- don't just regurgitate the same OV every speech (ensure that it evolves as the round progresses) -- for example, the 2AC OV should ideally cite a concession you were able to make in 1NC CX which brings me to pt 2

2. Actually try to have a productive CX with a preplanned strategy that you can actually use to win the round -- don't just have 3 minutes of nothingness. Additionally, retain your composure during CX (i.e. if your opponent is deliberately avoiding your question, rephrase your question instead of raising your tone)

3. Speak slowly and coherently, especially during final speeches. Speaking faster to say more than your opponents doesn't win rounds -- slowly and logically framing the round does. Thus, focus more on big-picture framing in the 2NR/2AR instead of getting bogged down in the line-by-line.

4. Have fun and have an engaging energy during your speech.

Good luck!

explain your arguments - the best debates go one or 2 stock issues and tell a cohesive story and explain your arguments in depth, instead of just asserting that the plan saves 92 million lives or that patent trolls are bad for innovation. explain what patent trolls do, what that looks like for companies, etc.

my views are strongly aligned with aaron he.

have fun!

octopus have 3 hearts

I do OO (Original Oratory) if you didn't know previously.

Delivery is a very important part of your speech

Make sure you have energy and enunciate clearly.

Rhetoric Policy Debate:

1. Be respectful and kind towards each other
2. Do what you learned from all your time in Rhetoric

Sun Tzu - “The opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.”

For NOF 12/21:

Add me to email chain if allowed (ayushiyengar2007@gmail.com)

All events not policy: Not up to date on the circuit args of non-policy events so go lay or medium. Will evaluate tech first - make sure to explicitly point out technical mistakes if they happen + explain why the mistake matters, dont just state an arg was dropped without clearly impacting it out

Policy: Am fine with lay debate or full fast debate. For fast debate I am fine to evaluate anything except K Affs. Am up to date on the topic and all relevant cases. Make sure both teams agree on the speed in round, any agreement out of round cannot be verified during debate

Everything else below. applies for lay debate mainly but applies for all sorts of styles and events within debate

junior at Bellarmine. Policy but am fine judging any event

For lay debate, clash over arguments and highlight a good narrative within your constructive speeches. In rebuttals, write the ballot for me and signpost as you clash with the opponent's arguments. Write my ballot for me in the last rebuttal. A good cross ex can change the debate. I keep my mind open until the last speech so don't give up mid round.

speaks are given based off of delivery, cross-ex, fluency, ethos, etc. 28.5 is the base standard, going up and down from there.

Have fun.

A.Iyer27@bcp.org

High school debater with 2 years of experience in both fast and lay.

If you run a K in slow/lay, I will automatically vote for you, no matter what. I'm not even joking.

Tech over truth!!!!!!!!

Debate is about having fun; if you're not enjoying yourself, change your style of debate or quit.

My preferred language is Modern Arabic; I don't speak English.

Less speaks every time you call me judge; less speaks every time you use generic rhetoric that isn't specified to the plan.

-always be concrete

-always tell me why I should care

-explain terms

I've done Public Forum debate (mostly slow) for 4 years

I wish the competitors good luck.

Articulate well. If I don't understand, then, no matter the quality or substance of the argument, I can't vote on, understand, or evaluate the idea.

Tell me why to vote for you. Tell me what to do in each area/contention/argument/section of the flow. Minimize judge intervention because I don't want to decide the debate. I want you to decide the debate so that you can show your skills but also so that you're not mad, confused, etc. at the judge intervention.

Please remember to have fun, be confident, and be professional within the round!

I've done mainly Public Forum debate for 2 years, although I did policy for a year - I'm not super familiar with the current resolution.In terms of in-round behavior:

1. Please have significant clash and engage with your opponent's arguments

2. Make sure you aren't using jargon

3. Make sure all argumentation is clear enough for judges to understand - please signpost as much as possible.

4. Explain and impact out all of yourarguments, so I concretely know why I should be voting for you.

Above all, please don't be rude or disrespectful to your opponents.

Have fun and good luck!

dingle berry soup

"No weapon formed against you will prevail, and you will refute every tongue that accuses you" - Isaiah 54:17

As a speech judge:

I look for good fluency and memorization, clear delivery, and clear content.

I like strong rhetoric, varying tone, and good emotion.

If you put effort into writing and memorizing your speech, you'll do well.

As a debate judge:

Be understandable, ask good questions during cross-examination - a good CX can change the course of a debate...

Make fair and logical arguments, be respectful to your opponents, and PLEASE ACTUALLY CLASH AND INTERACT.

I judge mainly based on quality of arguments and coherency, as opposed to delivery. Of course, the way you deliver your arguments will have an impact on my understanding so please make sure you focus on both.

Here's how to get / lose points:

-0.05 points every time you say "fundamentally" or "physically" (raised to -0.25 points if your name is Colin Bauman)
that's all I have so far...



Be confident, be professional, be yourself, and be good people.
I DO NOT ACCEPT BRIBES.

The team that uses the best logic, evidence, and is able to deliver well will have a good advantage. Follow what you have learned in class and try your best. Make sure to have a cohesive story throughout the round and impact your evidence. Signposting on the flow i.e. 1. , 2., 3. makes it a lot easier

BIGGEST THING: Don't just say "extend ____, which refutes their point." EXPLAIN that evidence and tell me why I should prefer your evidence over theirs (recency, qualification, etc)

Good luck

please be respectful and maintain proper etiquette throughout the round. be polite to your opponents and your partner, and remain professional at all times.

dropping a single ticky-tacky argument in the 1ar will not lose you the round. conversely, failing to respond to fundamental negative premises that underlie their arguments will. the same is also true for the affirmative. the portions of your speech that are spent on big picture framing - resolving and explaining why winning certain arguments are reasons to vote for you - will influence my decision far more than the technical back and forth within those arguments themselves.

in a similar vein, do not go for arguments simply because they were 'undercovered' by the other team. collapsing on arguments that are compelling because they are grounded in logic, evidence, and truth will give you the best chance of winning any round. responding and actively seeking clash rather than avoiding it will also be great for your grade.

Go slow and be clear. Don’t be rude or super uptight, especially in cross.

Make sure you weigh and tell me clearly which VIs/Stock Issues are winning you the debate.

Have fun!

+0.1 speaks for every minute before official round start the 1AC begins

Call me Andres, not judge

Frame well and respond to warrants in line-by-line (CLASH) and I'm pretty generous with your grade.

Reading your judge's paradigm is a good habit. Say "anarcho-syndicalism" after round for +0.2 speaks.

Unless:

-0.1 for saying 'dropped,' use "they have not explained why..."

-0.1 for every minute you delay round start

-0.1 every 15 seconds of prep you steal

-0.1 for being a snitch about prep time

-0.1 every time you call me 'judge' during your speeches

If both teams would agree, I would prefer to listen to a debate in Modern Hebrew/Ancient Greek

rohansontakke09@gmail.com

make sure to impact out ur args

Just a few things:

i do pf so i have no topic knowledge.

explain ur arguments well, please clash

don't be on ur phone unless it's to time, if i see u on ur phone ur not gonna like the grade u get

be respectful

have fun

I judge based on the fundemental rules of debate. I would prefer you talked to me as if im a parent judge clearly explaining why you won the debate or why your arguments should be valued over the other side's arguments.

Bellarmine '27 he/him

email: austin.yoo1026@gmail.com

--> add me to the email chain please

my views align with Benjamin Manens and Thomas Reese.

You get a good score if your speech is funny, unique, or out if pocket ❤️

.