I am open to any argument, as long as it makes sense and is backed up with evidence. The tagline must be what the card actually says.

In rounds, my main pet peeve is unclear tag lines. Be sure that you clearly enunciate the tagline if you want me to take it into account.

For critiques and theoretical arguments, make sure you clearly explain both the argument and its implications.

I try to be open-minded and fair about any arguments presented.

Hello! I am currently a University student studying Mathematics and Physics, but I competed in speech and debate for three years in high school and was a state champion in Public Forum Debate and Informative Speaking. I also competed in Extemporaneous and Impromptu and thus these events are what I am most comfortable judging. However, I am also familiar with all other forms of debate, and some speech (OO, expos, declamation, DI, and HI).

For Debate:

I am completely okay with off-time roadmaps. Anything that makes the round more orderly is great. That said, these should not be lengthy at all, just a quick 3-5 second roadmap.

If you speak too quickly, I will likely stop trying to understand you. This event is just as much about clear communication as it is about making strong arguments, so you may have the best case ever written, but it doesn't matter if you don't communicate it clearly.

Please clarify your frameworks for the round. This information can be crucial for weighing and if you don't then you're already making the round more difficult for yourself to clarify and for me to weigh.

Debate in good faith. Do not be rude to your opponent. I understand that these events are competitive and rounds can get heated. This is not an excuse for ad hominem, disingenuous attacks, or any arguments made in bad faith. If you act like this in the round, I'm voting for your opponent.

When it comes to evidence, I do not want to be added to an email chain. I will only ask to see a piece of evidence if I believe a debater has genuinely manipulated or lied about a card. On that note, please do not do this. Why even bother writing a case if you know it rests on a card that is wrong on the off chance that your opponent doesn't notice?

Please be clear with what your impacts are, and in the final couple of speeches WEIGH. Many debaters neglect to weigh their impacts and this leaves the round up to me to weigh. I want to invade the round as little as possible, tell me what is important, don't force me to assume what is important.

Finally, any racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, etc. will cause you to lose the round immediately.

So, good luck, and let's have a great round!

For Speech:

In general, please speak clearly and project.

I appreciate originality and creativity in events like Info and OO. There are many, MANY tropes of these events that are done and redone every year. While it is inevitable that some speeches will repeat across the thousands of students who compete in speech and debate, please make your best effort to have your speech pop out among the crowd.

(Side note for info specifically: I will not deduct any points of any sort for your boards not being laminated, covered in sparkles, magnetic, a complex Rube-Goldberg machine that can fly into orbit, etc. No event in speech and debate is more impacted by economic inequality. Not everyone can afford to spend several hundred dollars to make perfect boards and I completely understand. I appreciate quality boards, and they can make speeches more interesting to watch, but they will NEVER be an extremely impactful part of the round unless they hamper your communication in some way [dropping boards, malfunctions, etc.] )

Interp:

I'm sorry but this is not what I'm most proficient in. That said, I do know the basics and will do my best to evaluate the round fairly.

I am a history, theater and debate classroom teacher for 15 years. I have coached and judged debate on and off for 20 years. I enjoy, coach, and judge all debate events.

As far as my preferences go I am extremely laid back and open to any argument. I will entertain a K and enjoy creative argumentation--but don't forget the art and skill of communication! Please extend every argument in every speech, this is very important to me. I will vote on a T but it doesn't mean I love them. Do not let the T dominate the round. I want to see clash so I do not appreciate a "fairness" or "framework" debate if it is avoidable. I appreciate clear voters and proof you understand the argumentation that occurred in the round. Decorum is very important to me and will reflect in speaker points. The reason I am here for free, is because I love it and know the value of the activity-so show me that you love it too! I want the round to be fun, creative, and educational.

Hello! I am Jharick Shields. I am a speech and debate coach at St. Andrew's Episcopal School. I have been coaching for about 20 years and have coached debaters into late elimination rounds in a number of national circuit and NSDA/NCFL tournaments. I have also been fortunate to watch them win a few. Debate allows us the ability to critique the world and to substantively engage with those criticisms. It is a forum in which we communicate those ideas. How you communicate in front of me will directly correlate to the ballot I write. I am truth with tech. I think that you should be able to create a cohesive ballot story while also understanding the fundamentals of LD argumentation. You need to show me that you are reading the sources you are citing. You need to prove that you understand the context behind the arguments you run. You should engage with the arguments of your opponent. Is T engagement with an aff that is nontopical? I would say yes. However, the debater that will earn higher speaks from me will also critically think and engage the affirmative.

Speed is an part of the game of debate. Judge adaptation is also part of the game. I have no problem saying that I missed something on my flow. If the argument is super important, signpost and weigh it. Don't assume that an extension through ink is enough for me to pull the trigger. A lot of times in great debates, amazing weighing tends to win out on cold concessions. Great debaters explain why the argument was conceded. I think that the best debaters figure that out, and close the door on them. I prefer few, well developed arguments to many. However, its your world. I tend to get excited when I am asked to bring out a lot of paper. Just don't assume I got everything you said if you aren't utilizing good communication skills.

I am an old fashioned policy kid, who was fortunate enough to do LD as well. Policy arguments are my heart. I like great plan texts, plan flaws are a thing, CPs with net benefits, strong case debates, Ks(bonus for Ks with policy alts). If thats what you do, I am a really good judge in those rounds. You still have obligations to communicate...

If you are a traditional debater, I still have plenty of love to share. Some of the best rounds I have seen on the national circuit are kids reading a traditional aff. I watch as their opponent gets ready to run 5 off and case. The 1ar gets up, extends their conceded criterion/case evidence, no links the DAs/Ks, perms the CP/Alt and sits down. And maybe the debater doesn't use those terms, but if you make the argument clearly and labeled, I will bridge the educational gap in debate jargon. I am also a very good judge for you.

If you caught me during high school, maybe I could have gotten into tricks/skep stuff. Basically, I can evaluate it, and if both debaters are going down that road together, I won't be as upset going there. I think HEAVY weighing is the only way that I won't gut check for anything else in that debate. Maybe not the best for you, but maybe you just need a somewhat tech judge in a small pool then I am good.

Honestly, I just am really excited to see debates. Run what you want, be respectful, have fun! If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me prior to the round.

For MS Local Touraments:

Everything above applies. There are some things that students do in front of me that don't really help them win the ballot. Here are a few:

1.) Rules Lawyering: I get it, you want to show the judge that you know more about LD or at the very least have a lot of ethos. I must say, through my experience, these cases only end up with that debater losing some ethos. Telling me that something is an NSDA rule when we abide by MSHAA rules is sort of a bad argument. Telling me that a student must have a value, can't run a plan/CP, can't have a criterion, etc is just wrong. In theory, a student can run a case with just 1 contention and nothing else and it is fine. They don't lose the debate, they aren't disqualified, they live to debate another round. Win on the flow.

2.) New arguments: I don't flow these. If the new argument transcends the debate: a student has done something harmful in round, then its fine(but I will most likely intervene, since that is my duty). New evidence that supports arguments already made are fair game. A lot of debaters think that new evidence is the same as a new argument. It isn't.

3.) Mismanaging Drops: Debaters will tell me that an argument was dropped, but it wasn't. They will tell me that they have responded to an argument. They have not. Make sure that you are flowing. After the round, if you show me a quality flow of the debate(and if I have them on me). I will give you a candy/treat or something.

Okay, thanks!!