Hello, I am a parent of a varsity debater and I am more comfortable as a judge after some tournament experience. My professional background is social work, which I have been practicing since 1999. I am confident in my ability to see issues from multiple perspectives and I appreciate creative ideas. While I am an excellent listener, I have only moderate experience as debate judge, so it will be best for all of us if you speak at a conversational pace. The less jargon, the better. I value clear communication, transparency and respect and I expect debaters to show respect to one another throughout the competition. I will do my best to weigh the issues raised by each side. I will listen for comparison of arguments raised by one side and the other and note when one side refutes the argument of the other in a convincing way. I will vote for the most convincing issues and arguments.

Tell me why I should vote for you. Make sense. Explain your terms. Think of me as a relatively smart person who isn't debate-y. I'll vote for what makes sense. If I don't understand it, I can't vote for you.

Make every argument clear and tell me why it is important! Why should I vote for you?

No spreading. I do not have a problem with it on principle. I just will not be able to follow your argument. Please be clear in your articulation. Don’t use a ton of debate jargon/buzzwords- explain what you’re trying to say in your own words and make it clear. This goes for both policy and critical oriented debaters.

If your opponent misrepresents their evidence it is YOUR JOB to bring that to my attention. I rarely will call for a card.

Argument-Specific(I prefer traditional arguments)

Critical affs- very unfamiliar. Run them if you have NOTHING else, but be sure you explain yourself VERY clearly.

Neg arguments:
Disad- Explain the story/scenario of how the aff causes a specific impact and why that impact is the most important. I prefer you use traditional impact calculus in your framing.
Counterplan- Provide a competitive counterplan and explain the NET BENEFITS of why the counterplan is better than the aff
Topicality- Prove the aff is untopical and tell me why it’s important
Kritik- Unfamiliar- explain every argument clearly. I strongly advise you not to run one. If you chose to run a K, narrow the argument down to the impacts of the K.

Add me to the email chain: tgio@me.com

I am committed to evaluating the arguments presented by both teams based on their clarity, logic, and evidence without bias. My aim is to provide a fair and educational experience for all. Please speak slowly and track your time. I look forward to hearing your arguments!

1. Clarity of thought and how you make your point.
2. Eye-contact: maintain good contact with all involved and not talk to one person.
3. Tone- should be assertive and not aggressive.
4. Overall body language/ gestures when in debate- avoid being dismissive about your opponent.
5. Time management.

My name is Ms. Reyes, I work at Bronx Science and I am first-time traditional judge. Please speak slowly and clearly and do not run any progressive arguments. I appreciate it when debaters are kind to each other. Have a good round!

This is my second year serving as parent/lay debate judge. To better understand my judging style, please observe the following:

1. Reasonable speed. English is my adopted language. I prefer conversational speed (fast conversational speed is OK). Rapid fire speaking will not serve you well as it makes you hard to follow. Imagine if presidential debate sounds like firecrackers pop.

2. Quality, well-explained arguments should trump a mere quantity thereof. Debaters should use quoted evidence to support their claims, and well-chosen, relevant evidence may strengthen – but not replace – arguments.

3. Evidence needs to be logical, congruent to your augment and from reliable sources. You need to use reasoning to weave through carefully selected evidence in strengthening your argument or in rebuttals. If evidence sounds illogical and you do not explain it well, I will dismiss it.

4. for LD debate, Value framework and criterion should be clearly defined and established

5. I value arguments that are substantive, meaningful and relatable to real life experiences, rather than only relying on rhetorical skills.

6. I give higher score to debaters who show respect and sportsmanship. Overly aggressive demeanors or disrespectful acts will be negatively noted. Strong but polite delivery is what I will be looking for.

Importantly, don't forget to have fun!