Email: dev.d.arora@gmail.com

I am currently a student at Hunter College High School.

I have been debating in PF since 7th grade and I have some experience in Worlds School debate.

I am your average tech judge. I judge based on the flow. I am familiar with most Ks and theory shells at this point and will evaluate all of them. (I am not a fan of trix and do not consider them in my decision.)

Ev ethics: I am not particularly strict, however, any team that abhorrently misrepresents ev will be auto-dropped. I am not against paraphrasing on principle, however, I am open to Paraphrase theory as a response.

Defense is not sticky!!! Extend defense pls

Collapse in Summ

Weighing must come at the latest in Summ, and should start in Reb

Fully extend offense in Summ

Everything in FF should be in Summary (Mostly)

Tech>Truth

Have fun!!

Be respectful.

Average speech will revive a 28.5.

Some ways to get a 30:

1. Show some personality in speech
2. Impress me with strategy
3. Use of literary devices such as metaphors
5. Technically flawless
6. Fire debate fit

Open to questions about my paradigm

Hi! I'm Mr. Judson, the BISZ Middle School Speech and Debate teacher. I have been a Speech and Debate teacher for the last 5 years, focusing on Asian Parliamentary Debate, and I transitioned to teaching Public Forum Debate last year.

For competitive fairness, I believe judges need to be a blank slate, thus it is your responsibility to tell me everything. You cannot infer my knowledge about a topic as I will have none, so clearly establishing information in your warrant is important.

For content, I value analysis over evidence. In my opinion, data is a tool to support your ideas and explanation. It should not be your main explanation. A good debater does not just throw information at opponents, but rather contextualizes and explains those key facts. Of course, you are not an expert in the field we're debating on, so evidence is still absolutely needed, but you should focus on logically explaining the reasoning and then setting up that evidence to be presented. In addition, I really like clear roadmapping, just a personal preference so I can organize my ballot is all.

Summary speeches should clearly expand arguments first and foremost with rebuttals acting as a secondary. Additional arguments raised in crossfire will be not weighed less unless expanded upon in the summary. On the other hand, I view final focus as a time to build a more emotionally charged impact-based speech.

I prefer to allow students moderate their own timing and interactions, and take more of a passive role in moderating debates. If a student is very rude or disrespectful, then I will step in as needed.