julianvgagnon@gmail.com please add me to email chains

from planet debate-

this is difficult for me b/c i'm not sure i have A judging philosophy but I do have many different ideas about and for debate...some inconsistent. that being said i don't want what i think about debate to totally dictate what debaters decide to do in rounds.

topicality- generally don't like it. I find no abuse args to be really persuasive. Since I like critical arguments so much I think you can usually find ground in any debate. i don't like the competing interpretations framework very much. i find the "that limits out any aff" arg to be persuasive. but i will vote on that framework and topicality if left unchallenged. in a good topicality debate on competeing interp vs an ok no abuse arg i'll USUALLY vote aff.

cp- like em. with a critical nb even better. i think i'm a fair judge for these debates. aff theory args generally not persuasive unless unchallenged. very similar to topicality in this regards.

das- great. a lot of people are now struggling with the we control the uniqueness = a risk vs. we got d/risk of turn. i don't think the aff has to have offense to win a da but i do find in a lot of debates that with only defense it hurts the aff a bunch. especially when the neg has a cp. but i tend to weight the da first in terms of probability and then magnitude.

critical args- love em. these are the debates i find the most interesting. i'm willing to listen to virtually any way the neg wants to present them. method. alternative. text no text. don't care. case turn. obviously it's the neg's burden to provide some way to evaluate their "framework" but in terms of theory i think they are all pretty much legit. args are args and it's the other teams responsibility to answer them.

others- i like to see people be nice to each other in debate rounds. some people may say i intervene sometimes. it's true but let me provide context. if you go for you mis-spelled (jk) a word in your plan and you should lose and your winning the arg but the other team says this is stupid...we'll i'm persuaded. you just wasted a bunch of peoples time. another thing. DON'T RUN MALTHUS IN FRONT OF ME- DOESN'T MATTER IF IT RIGHTS OR NOT. i won't flow it. i think that while debate is a game we still have a responsibility to "speak truth to power". discourse is very important. definately co-constitutes with reality. this may be why i'm starting/have been hating the politics debate for the last year and a half. but hey, like i said before, i'm full of inconsistancies b/c sometimes you just don't have another arg in the box to go for. i'm sympathetic to this. especially in high school debate. i still research it for the hs topic and coach my kids to go for it.


from debateresults...

Debate is a game- i have a lot of ideas about how the game should be played but in the absence of teams making those arguments i won't default to them. i think debate should make the rules of the game and provide a framework for how i should evaulte the debate. i'm not a big fan of some arguments...like malthus in particular...but also theory arguments in general. these debates generally happen faster then my mind and pen can handle. ive judged a lot although i haven't much this year on the china topic. some people may think i have a bias towards critical arguments, and while this is true to some degree (i generally find them more intersting than other debates), it also means i have higher standards when it comes to these debates. yeah imagine that, me with high standards.

Tina Kileo

Age: 25yrs

College: Chifeng University

Current occupancy : Student in University

Hello I am experienced to judging so generally speaking I tend to be motivated by well reasoned logic with superior supporting evidence. I have participated in more than nine tournaments so far and got an opportunity to judge different kinds of speech including Extemporaneous speech, Impromptu speech, oral interpretation and original oratory speech.Im okay with high speed when it comes to delivering a speech. But I’d say that if you do speed then please be clear in pronunciation. Also don’t use speed as a weapon not to elaborate the point clearly. That is the worst and the speaker points will reflect on that.Aggressiveness is not a problem to me but it depends on an extent to which it reaches. I will evaluate and listen to every argument in the debate (unless it is overly racist, sexist, homophonic, transphobic etc) so as objectively as possible you do you in a respectful manner.To determine a winner of the debate; I like arguments that are supported by evidence. However I evaluate the round based on arguments under whichever framework is best defended (including warranting that framework) Just winning framework doesn’t win the round. I need to see offensive arguments generated under a framework. I struggle to evaluate non-topical or extra-topical arguments and I’m much happier to vote for arguments that clearly link back to advocating one side of the resolution.

I care most about the round being educational and safe. I’m open to vote for anything, just let me know why.

Name:JORDAN ROGART KUBAGWA. University:GUANGDONG POLYTHENIC NORMAL UNIVERSITY. Age:27 Debaters I value fairness, clarity and engagement. I prioritize the framework you provide, but if none are presented, I default to cost benefit analysis.Logical,well supported arguments that directly engage with opponets are essential.speak clearly -speed is fine but clarity is key.weigh your impacts and explain why your arguments matters most.Respect is crucial;I won't tolerate disrespectful behavior. Goodlluck looking forward to hear your arguments.

Hello debaters!

"As a Public Forum judge, my main focus is on clarity, logic, and effective communication. I prioritize clear communication, logical arguments, and the effective use of evidence. Please speak clearly and at a moderate pace, ensuring that your arguments are easy to follow. Construct a logical framework for your case, outlining key contentions and their relevance to the resolution.

Quality evidence is essential. Focus on solid and relevant sources that support your claims. During Crossfire, engage respectfully with opponents, clarifying positions without talking over each other. In rebuttals, prioritize the most crucial points. Respond to opponents' arguments with clarity and explain the impact of your rebuttals on the debate's flow.

In the Final Focus, summarize key arguments and emphasize why your case prevails, weighing the round and guiding my decision. Adaptability is crucial. Address new arguments introduced by opponents and showcase strategic thinking. Maintain professionalism throughout, avoiding personal attacks or offensive language. Treat opponents with respect.

Remember, I'm here to objectively evaluate the round based on the presented arguments. Good luck!"

Judge Philosophies

1.Judge’s Name: Tinashe Mbonyeya

2.Tell us about your debate judging experience.

a.I have judged debate for less than a year and have judged Public Forum before.

3.Tell us about your debating experience.

e.I have debated other formats for more than a year, but not Public Forum.

4.What is your speaking speed preference

c.TED talk speed (150-200wpm)

5.How much do you know about the topic?

c.I regularly read news about this topic. It’s an interest of mine.

6.Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?

a.Yes, if the second rebuttal doesn’t respond to the first rebuttal I consider it a dropped argument.

7.How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?

a.It’s very important. I take lots of notes and make my decision based almost entirely based on my notes.

8.What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?

• The winning team is the team who best proves their side of the topic some of the factor includes,

1.Resolution Understanding

- Clarity: Understanding the resolution and its implications is crucial.

- Context: Knowledge of the topic's background and current relevance.

2. Evidence and Research

- Quality of Evidence: Reliable sources and data strengthen arguments.

- Relevance: Information must directly support the case being made.

3. Argument Structure

- Logical Flow: Arguments should be coherent and well-organized.

- Impact: Emphasizing the significance of arguments on the resolution.

4. Counterarguments

- Anticipation: Identifying potential counterarguments beforehand.

- Rebuttal Preparedness: Being ready to effectively counter opposition claims.

5. Persuasiveness

- Rhetorical Techniques: Use of ethos, pathos, and logos to appeal to the audience.

- Delivery: Tone, pace, and body language can significantly affect reception.

6. Judging Criteria

- Frameworks: Understanding how judges evaluate arguments (e.g., weighing impacts).

- Prioritization: Knowing which arguments are likely to resonate more with judges.

7. Team Dynamics

- Collaboration: Effective teamwork and communication strategies.

- Role Allocation: Assigning specific roles based on strengths.

8. Audience Engagement

- Understanding the Audience: Tailoring arguments to resonate with the audience.

- Emotional Appeal: Connecting with the audience on an emotional level can enhance persuasiveness.

9. Time Management

- Pacing Arguments: Allocating time effectively to cover all points.

- Preparation for Crossfire: Anticipating questions and managing responses within time limits.

9.Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?

- During the crossfire students should be try to address all the rebuttal for this may also be used on factoring which team wins.

TINASHE MBONYEYA

Debating Experience:

Obtained all NSDA certifications and they are all linked to my tabroom account (mbonyeyatinashe911@gmail.com)

First place in 2016at Zimbabwe Public Speaking and Debating Championship Marondera district.

1st Price, at District Schools Debate Tournament.

2^nd Best Public Speaker at High school District competitions.

Judging Experience:

I have obtained all NSDA Certifications and l have judged 2024 TOC Asia Summer nationals offline Shenzhen and 2024 NHSDLC Zhengzhou PS and PF offline .I know I have a strong sense of fairness and objectivity. My ability to analyze situations critically, communicate effectively, and make well-reasoned decisions sets me apart. I am committed to upholding justice, treating all parties with respect and impartiality.

Judging Preference or Judging criteria:

As a debate judge, I evaluate the clarity and relevance of foundational premise. This is an essential starting point as it lays out the groundwork for the entire debate and build a strong persuasive argument.

Following that, I will examine the logic of the arguments and the coherence of the criterion. It is important that the criterion aligns with the value premise and establish a clear framework for assessment. If a criterion is well defined the argument is more convincing.

I also analyze the contentions and evidence put forth, looking for effective support, logical reasoning, and compelling argumentation. The evidence must be relevant, credible and effectively to reinforce the debater’s position.

I also assess the depth (i.e) (how thoughtful) and responsiveness of the counter-argument .A robust counter-argument should reflect an understanding of the opposing viewpoint, while a successful rebuttal effectively challenges and refutes those arguments.

Finally, I consider the overall structure, lucidity and persuasiveness of the debate. A well-organized debate that is clear and free from confusion is essential for delivering a compelling argument. The debater who presents the more convincing case by demonstrating a solid comprehension of the value and criterion, effectively addressing opposing arguments and showcasing strong persuasiveness skills, will emerge as the victor in the debate.

Personal Tencent Meeting Code/ PersonalVoovMeeting Code:

#èÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ…¾è®¯ä¼Âš议:451-866-1235

Tabroom Email address: mbonyeyatinashe911@gmail.com

Location: Zaozhuang University Shandong Province Zaozhuang CityShizhong District Qiushi Rd

I've judged debates and speeches at various levels, including high school and college competitions. My experience spans different formats, such as Public Forum debates, as well as individual events like original oratory. In judging, I prioritize clarity, logical consistency, and effective communication, providing detailed feedback to help participants improve. My background in these areas has given me a deep understanding of argumentation, rhetoric, and the importance of presenting ideas persuasively and coherently.

1. Judge’s Name
Charles Junior Mupotaringa
2. Tell us about your debate judging experience.
a. Ihave never judged debate before.
b. I have judged debate for less than a year and this is my first time judging Public Forum.
c. I have judged debate for less than a year and have judged Public Forum before.
d. I have judged debate for more than a year, but Public Forum for less than a year.
e. I have judged Public Forum debate for more than a year.
3. Tell us about your debating experience.
a. I have never debated competitively before.
b. I debated Public Forum for less than a year.
c. I debated other formats for less than a year.
d. I have debated Public Forum for more than a year.
e. I have debated other formats for more than a year, but not Public Forum.
4. What is your speaking speed preference?
a. Deliberate speed (100-120wpm)
b. Conversational speed (120-150wpm)
c. TED talk speed (150-200wpm)
d. Fast speed (200+wpm)
5. How much do you know about the topic?
a. I coach debate and have researched this topic
b. I have professional-level knowledge about this topic.
c. I regularly read news about this topic. It’s an interest of mine.
d. I pay attention to this topic, but I don’t go out of my way to know about it.
e. I have no idea about the topic. Please make sure I understand things.
6. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?
a. Yes, if the second rebuttal doesn’t respond to the first rebuttal I consider it a dropped argument
b. No, the second speaker rebuttal is only responsible for answering the first constructive
c. I’m not sure.
d. Other (please specify)
7. How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?
a. It’s very important. I take lots of notes and make my decision based almost entirely based on my notes.
b. It’s somewhat important. I use my notes to aid me in making my decision.
c. It’s not that important. I tend to judge the debate more wholistically.
d. Other (Please Specify)
8. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?
Clarity, evidence, logic and persuasiveness, those are the four main factors i consider when evaluating arguments from each team. I also look at the presentation style, organization and structure, speaking skills and demeanor from the debaters of each team for me to be able to make my final decision.
9. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?

I appreciate clarity,professionalism,respectful behavior and debaters who adhere to the debate rules. Fairness and open mindedness are my approach to each and every argument that is presented by the debaters, hence with this i can say my judgement to each team is without bias.

Judge Philosophies\

Judge’s Name : TINASHE NERWANDE

2 Tell us about your debate judging experience.

I have judged Public Forum debate for more than a year.

3. Tell us about your debating experience.

I h I have debated other formats for more than a year, but not Public Forum.

4. 4. What is your speaking speed preference?

a. TED talk speed (150-200wpm)

5. How much do you know about the topic?

a. I l pay attention to this topic, but I don’t go out of my way to know about it.

e.

6. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?

a.

b. No, the second speaker rebuttal is only responsible for answering the first constructive

c

7. How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?

a. It’s very important. I take lots of notes and make my decision based almost entirely based on my notes.

b

8. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?

As a judge I take note of the quality of reasoning and the speaker's points to be essential factors in evaluating the debate. I assess how well each speaker presents their arguments, supports them with evidence, and addresses the topic at hand. I also look at the structure and organization of their points, as well as their ability to effectively engage with their opponents' arguments.

Additionally, I consider the clarity and persuasiveness of the speakers' delivery, including their tone, demeanor, and ability to connect with the audience.By evaluating both the reasoning behind the arguments and the effectiveness of the speakers' points, I aim to determine the overall quality of the debate and select the most compelling team as the winner

9. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?

I suggest debaters to make sure you do as much research on the topic as you could before entering the round. You only succeed with over-preparation. Have a fun debate.

I am a very expressive judge. I will have several nonverbal that will tell you how I feel about an argument. Don't take it personal, I do it to everyone in basically every round and it might help you win round.

I like to keep an open mind about most things. The thing I love the most in debate is the impacts. I enjoy big impacts and I enjoy hearing them blown up (no nuke war pun intended) in the round. Small impacts are not immediately shut down, but I will say that it would be more persuasive to have evidence that tells me to prefer these impacts.

I am okay with most types of speed and I will let you know if I can't keep up. I will say that if you do speed please be clear.

I will disclose results based on Tournament policy

I am willing to discuss any specific questions you have in the round.

Judge Philosophies

1. Judge’s Name: Alvin Stanley 2. Tell us about your debate judging experience.[e]

a. I have never judged debate before.

b. I have judged debate for less than a year and this is my first time judging Public Forum.

c. I have judged debate for less than a year and have judged Public Forum before.

d. I have judged debate for more than a year, but Public Forum for less than a year.

e. I have judged Public Forum debate for more than a year.

3. Tell us about your debating experience.[d]

a. I have never debated competitively before.

b. I debated Public Forum for less than a year.

c. I debated other formats for less than a year.

d. I have debated Public Forum for more than a year.

e. I have debated other formats for more than a year, but not Public Forum.

4. What is your speaking speed preference?[c]

a. Deliberate speed (100-120wpm)

b. Conversational speed (120-150wpm)

c. TED talk speed (150-200wpm)

d. Fast speed (200+wpm)

5. How much do you know about the topic?[d]

a. I coach debate and have researched this topic

b. I have professional-level knowledge about this topic.

c. I regularly read news about this topic. It’s an interest of mine.

d. I pay attention to this topic, but I don’t go out of my way to know about it.

e. I have no idea about the topic. Please make sure I understand things.

6. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?[d]

a. Yes, if the second rebuttal doesn’t respond to the first rebuttal I consider it a dropped argument

b. No, the second speaker rebuttal is only responsible for answering the first constructive

c. I’m not sure.

d. Other (please specify)

In Public Forum debate, it's generally expected that the second rebuttal speaker will engage with the arguments presented by the first rebuttal speaker. This often involves frontlining, where they directly address and counter the points made by the opposing team.

7. How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?[b]

a. It’s very important. I take lots of notes and make my decision based almost entirely based on my notes.

b. It’s somewhat important. I use my notes to aid me in making my decision.

c. It’s not that important. I tend to judge the debate more wholistically.

d. Other (Please Specify)

8. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate? The factors that determine the winner in PF debate and speech events include argument strength, rebuttal effectiveness, crossfire performance, clarity, organization, impact, and delivery. 9. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?

I appreciate well-structured speeches that are easy to follow and deliver persuasive points with confidence and clarity. Additionally, adhering to time limits and demonstrating adaptability and strategic thinking throughout the debate

(new paradigm) Alvin Zablon Stanley

1. What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?

PF Debater (2014-2022)

NHSDLC, WSDA ,Toc , Basis, Zolo , Dialogue Judge(2022-now)

2. How do you consider fast-talking?

As long as you can express your argument clearly, I don’t care whether you talk fast or not. In my case, the speed of speech does not affect the debater's score, but the accuracy of the message does.

3. How do you consider aggressiveness?

I like to see the debaters be aggressive as long as they respect the opponent and don't affect their game.

4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?

Argument Strength: Are the debater's arguments logical, well-supported, and convincing? Do they effectively address counterarguments?

Evidence: Is the debater using credible sources and facts to back up their claims?

Organization and Clarity: Is the debater's argument easy to follow? Are their points clearly laid out and well-connected?

Rebuttal: How effectively does the debater challenge and refute their opponent's arguments?

Adherence to Topic: Is the debater staying focused on the resolution and addressing all its key aspects?

5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.

1)Maintain a respectful and civil tone throughout the debate, even when strongly disagreeing with your opponent.

2) Directly address your opponent's points and engage with their argument. Simply presenting your case without refuting theirs is not enough.

6. How many public forums debate tournaments have you judged in the past year?

A. 0-5

B. 6-10

C. 11+

7. How many notes do you take during a debate?

A. I try to take notes on everything.

B. I write down the points I think are important.

C. I take few notes and focus more on the overall presentation.

8. What is the main job of the summary speech?

A. Summarize the main arguments in the debate.

B. Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.

C. Answer all the attacks on your contentions made by the rebuttal speech.

Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.

9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making?9

10. How important is framework to your decision making?7

11. How important is crossfire in your decision making?7

12. How important is weighing in your decision making?10

13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?7

14. How fast should students speak?5– moderate pace will help when it comes to noting key points rather than the idea that a debater should finish all their points when they are not clear.