Hey, I'm Paul, a rising senior at Stratford High School. I mainly compete in Extemp, and have finaled at UIL State twice, quartered the UT Longhorn in USX, and quartered TFA State in IX. I also have some experience in Oratory.

Debate:

• Consider me a truth judge, as I will not look favorably on arguments that are not backed up properly. I like to see interesting takes on topics, but ones that can reasonably be backed up in reality.
• I can flow pretty fast. Take that how you will.
• I will USUALLY disclose if both sides want me to, but will ask for consent before doing so.

Oratory/Info:

For PA events other than Extemp, I generally tend to give equal weight to delivery and writing. I like a polished speech, but I want to see the humanity in it; I should be able to tell why you picked this topic over anything else you could have done.

In Oratory specifically, I need solutions. These solutions should be relevant to your topic and towards your audience. As far as I'm concerned, an Oratory without solutions is pointless.

Congress:

I have some experience in Congress, so I know what the event is supposed to look like, and what it is not. I absolutely abhor the toxic culture that seems to be prevalent which advances being rude and bullying people in order to show "dominance". I value unique arguments, and don't like seeing rehash. Again, please be nice, especially in questioning.

Extemp:

In Extemp, I definitely value analysis over delivery, although delivery is important and I will take that into account. I like to see structure, and your substructure across all three points should be the same (unified analysis) except in VERY rare circumstances (ie super complex court or econ topics).

I almost act as a cross examiner when watching speeches, trying to find weak areas and how you address them. I like to see logical arguments that flow nicely which I have a hard time poking holes in them. I'd actually advise trying this in prep: think about the questions a cross examiner could ask, and address them so that the logic is more sound.

Speaking of cross examination, be nice. I don't particularly like seeing the more "Congressy" style of cross. Although you should obviously strive to ask good questions, and I will reward you if you do, you should ask them politely; cross should look a lot more like an news interview of an expert than a cheap TV show's version of a courtroom.

As for AGDs, I don't value them that highly. What I mean by this is not to refrain from having them, but I would rather not see one than a bad one. They should be clearly linked to your topic, and look like something that is applicable to this speech, not just a device you pull out every time you get a question with the word Nigeria in it.

I do not like canned or inappropriate AGDs, and while I usually won't give it an automatic 6, I will definitely down you for it. In addition, AGDs stolen from NSDA finals are not something you should be using; everyone has seen those, and everyone will know you are fine with plagiarism. This doesn't go so much for ideas that are so widely used that they are in the "public domain" per se, but you should be able to come up with something about it that is unique to you; I don't like canned punchlines.

Interp:

Please don't let me be your Interp judge. I have absolutely no experience, and don't like the event. If that fails, I would like to see clear character transitions (in HI especially), energy that doesn't look too rehearsed, and vocal variety (ie don't just yell at me for ten minutes, have levels). Otherwise, consider me a lay judge.

In all events, DO NOT USE YOUR PHONE IN ROUND. I will drop you to the heaviest extent possible that I can in the event, as will most other judges.

Full paradigm: (Updated for EIF Scrimmages on 2/10/25)

Hi i'm Sadie! I'm a junior at Cheyenne East High School in Wyoming. I've championed the James Logan MLK Invitational in IX, and currently boast 6 career NIETOC bids and 1 TOC Bid. I have seen really really baseline rural extemp and very techy Texas extemp, and I will vote for either of them depending on the delivery of a performance! My personal recommendations for winning my ballot are as follows:

You HAVE to deliver your speech well. If you want to read an essay in front of an audience, do DECA or something Idk. Content is obviously important, but I'm a firm subscriber to the belief that if you can't entertain no one will listen, so make sure your speech is fun to watch. I'm totally okay with giving a silly speech the 1! + There are VERY few jokes that cross a line for me, feel free to be a tad bit risky on those- it totally could pay off.

In terms of your content, I will try not to step in argument wise- the way you answer the question is your choice, and I'll never say you answer is wrong on a fundamental level. However, In choosing an answer, you decide what you will defend and I will hold you to a certain standard in defending it: things like credible evidence, solid substructure and understandable argumentation will make a solid speech, even if I fundamentally disagree. PSA: I cannot stress this enough, do NOT make human rights into a joke. If your speech is about the economy, go ahead. But if your speech is about war, you need to acknowledge the scope of the situation at some point, so your speech feels human.

Sources that will earn you extra points with me: Christian Science Monitor, Harvard Business Review, Carnegie Endowment, Cato, Stanford Review, Pew Research, etc.

Sources that will dock you points with me: Vox, Fox News, Reddit (wish that was a joke), Random think tanks that no one has ever heard of (just because the name is 5 words doesn't make it a good source), and 24 news services (MSN, ABC, CNN)

Lastly, have fun!! I was once in your shoes, an extemper wanting to achieve great things- you absolutely can if you work at it and enjoy the art of extemp speaking- enjoy the round and chances are, so will I.

IF YOU"RE HERE AS A DEBATER:

I'll flow- do NOT gaslight me. If you are going to claim opp dropped something you'd better be sure. I love value criterion debate but please make sure your value is a value- I don't understand why I should care moral about Emotional Ammoralism when you compare it to human life. Spread as hard as you want, but if you plan on speaking unclear slide me your case to read while you're yapping. I would consider myself a tech judge and I'll vote on anything. Saying "that argument is dumb and far-fetched" has never worked in real world scenarios, and it won't work here.

Be nice to your opponent in CX. Take control of your CX period, but sassy rude remarks lose you credibility with me. (Interrupting is fine)

Maybe try to use your voice for something good. I promise, that no matter what side of what resolution you're debating, there is an opportunity to help other people, and your case doesn't have to be heartless.

I will look for morals in EVERY debate, not just LD.

if you have any questions at all you can feel free to contact me at:

307-369-3746

sadiezwonitzer@gmail.com