Hello! It is a pleasure to be able to judge you today! I competed for all 4 years of my high school career and it is a pleasure to be on the other side. Below are all of my paradigms but let me go ahead and tell you the number one thing I look for. I want you to have a passion for the thing or things you are speaking about. Even in debate, you can have passion and meaning behind the ideas that you are presenting to me, so never only see what you are doing as a way to win tournaments or get scholarships, see it as a celebration of the next generation coming together to solve issues for a better future!

BIG NOTE: I DO NOT PUT UP WITH BULLYING OR HARASSMENT IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD! THIS INCLUDES 'FEAR TACTICS'.

Interpretation Events: I love interp! This was my specialty when I competed which means it has a deep place in my heart, but it also means I have high expectations. When in any interpretation round, I look for realness. Do not do or say anything just because you know it sounds or looks pretty. Why are you doing anything in your piece? Make sure that every word and movement is motivated and you will encapsulate me completely.

Extemporaneous Events: I have a very basic paradigm when it comes to this event. Look like you are the expert on your topic. I really do not care if half of the things you say are wrong, as long as you make me believe they're right. Also, do not try to woo me with humor to distract me; it doesn't work.

LD: Structure! Keep your structure! Debate events can be very hard to follow sometimes because we are juggling so many different arguments at the same time. I am decent at flowing, but I don't want to have to look back at it every second to remember where we are at. If you are clear about where you are and what you are doing, I am more likely to award you more speaker points.

Congress: The main thing I look for is professionalism. I know that there is a lot of trading that goes on outside of the round; that I cannot stop, but I can do my best to make sure that everything goes fair inside of the round. Everyone is a team player here. Everyone gets their turn to speak. Everyone is treated fairly and everyone has their voice.

CX: I will make sure I am as prepared as I can be but this is not my strong suit. With that being said! Give me a clear flow. A clear flow equals a clear ballot in these rounds.

Policy/CX Debate:

I am a stock issues judge, I prefer the affirmative to defend all 5 stock issues. The affirmative and the negative should both create direct clash by responding to ALL of their opponents' arguments. To me, an argument that does not have a response is an argument that is won by the team that made the argument. I do not like kritiks. Topicalities are great, but I don't like time being wasted on endless topicality arguments. Disadvantages are also a good argument, but should be formatted correctly and have all four necessary parts. CPs should have a net benefit, or they are not better than the affirmative case. On case arguments are the most effective arguments in my opinion, as long as they relate directly to the opponent's case. I will also listen to reasonable theory arguments. The following is personal preference, but one thing that irks me as a judge is teams that kick arguments that they are winning or that there is good debate on, only kick arguments if you're absolutely sure the argument will have no impact on the round at all. Also, when you kick an argument, please be explicit about kicking the argument and don't "silent kick" an argument.

Style and Delivery Preferences:

I want to be able to understand every word you say. I will award higher speaker points to debaters that speak the most fluently, with the fewest mistakes, as long as I understand them.

Debate:

I would consider myself a fairly TAB judge. I'm usually pretty go with the flow... (haha see what I did there) :) But if you have any questions about my paradigm in specific, then feel free to ask. I don't tolerate any blatant racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or any bigotry in my rounds (I will vote you down). Make sure everyone carries themselves in an ethical manner and is respectful of each other in the round. Debate is about communication and education so make sure you can articulate every part of the case and you understand what you're talking about. I don't flow CX so don't make arguments to me during the cross period because I will not write it down. I'm good with spreading but would prefer a copy of the document if you do so.

2023-24 Policy Topic

Signposting helps guys. Also speech doc would be nice. I would say I've done some research this year especially with my college debate team over this topic, seeing as we all coach teams from around the state of Texas. However, if you are running something kritikal over this topic, make sure you can articulate it, I read a good bit of critical literature now, but can't say I'm used to it all.

-Topicality/Theory: I rate theory and topicality pretty high on my flow unless the debaters communicate how and why I shouldn't. If you don't read all parts to a T-shell that includes (The definition, the violation, and standards and voters) then I won't consider it a real argument. Please don't be abusive and not read standards and voters in the initial shell, I'll consider and half-made argument. But you're more than welcome to expand on them in any speech.

-DA's/ADV's:I rate these arguments pretty high as well. Make sure they have all the components to them. Framing can heavily affect how I weigh these arguments so make sure you can articulate why the impacts of your advantages and disadvantages outweigh.

- CP's/Kritiks:I rate these arguments as high as any other. Make sure you can weigh the counter advocacy/alternative against the plan. Framing is a key player here for me so make sure both sides of the debate give be aROB: Roll of the ballot and a framing mechanism to weigh the aff vs. neg.

-Framing: I'm cool with all framing, but don't just run util good and not explain how it adds to the debate space. UTIL is my least favorite framing so make sure you have a lot in terms of explanation on the flow for reasoning as to why I should vote for it. Anyways make sure you're framing adds to the debate and doesn't just take up time especially if you and your opponent agree on how the round should be framed.