Judging Preferences

Debate: I prefer having debaters with cameras on but it's okay if you have technical difficulties. The contents of your contention and the logic behind it are more important to me than hypothetical statements. I prefer if debaters spoke clearly instead of quickly. I'm good with off-time road-maps and etc, just ask so I don't automatically begin your time on the first word. I keep a timer on my phone so then you as debaters don't have to but you can. I'll do a hand signal when its 30 seconds, then again at 10 seconds. I will start off by asking for pro names and speaker placements then go to con.

Speech: I would like it if students would state their entry code number/their name then write/tell me their prompt so I know. Make it fun and enthusiastic! I keep a timer on my phone so then you as debaters don't have to but you can. I'll do a hand signal when its at 3 minutes, then 1 minute, 30 seconds, and finally at 10 seconds.

How I write ballots

I will always write on the ballot if asked but on the private section, I will list glows then grows. I usually use examples to explain what exactly I thought was clever. I'll use sections in the grow section to make it clear what the area of improvement is.

Rules during the round

As the round continues, if I see that any side of the debaters are being too loud as well as guests I can and will give one warning to lower their volume, after that warning I will ask them to please remove themselves, if they are guests. If they are debaters, I will remove speaker points. I will ask for anyone present in the room not to speak about the round or at all while I put my ballot. This is for me to be able to make a decision based on my interpretation of the round without any added information or clarification.

Engineering grad and IT practitioner; have been judging debate since 2018. I did PF all through high school in Virginia.

General:

1. I'm fine with speed; just speak clearly.

2a. Time yourself. When you run out of time, finish your sentence gracefully, on a strong note, and stop speaking.

2b. I will also time you. When you run out of time, I will silently stop taking notes on my flow and wait for you to finish. I will cut you off if you are 30 seconds over time; if I cut you off, it means I didn't listen to anything you said for roughly the last 30 seconds.

3. I don't care if you sit or stand. Do whatever works.

4. Although I like hearing Ks, I think they're cool and I like when debaters deconstruct the format/topic/incentive structure of debate... I don't like evaluating them and voting off them as a judge. It's outside my comfort zone as a judge and I don't have the experience and confidence to evaluate Ks in a way that is consistent and fair. I use my paradgm here to disclose what I vote off, and I'm not likely to change my mind in-round to vote on a K.

PF:

I vote on terminal impacts. Use your constructive to state and quantify impacts that I as a human can care about. I care exclusively about saving lives, reducing suffering and increasing happiness, in descending order of importance. Provide warrants and evidence for your claims, then extend your claims and impacts through to final focus. In final focus, weigh: tell me *how* you won in terms of the impacts I care about.

0. Cut your cards in advance and be on the ball with finding and sharing them. If you can't find your card promptly we'll assume it doesn't exist and move on.

1. Please indict bad cards. Misleading claims, baseless speculation, "studies" that don't exist, that sort of junk: if you convince me it's bad, I'll strike it gleefully from my flow.

2. Be nice to each other in cross; let the other person finish. Cut them off if they are monopolizing time.

3. If you want me to consider an argument when I vote, extend it all the way through final focus.

LD:

The way I vote in LD is different from how I vote in PF. In the most narrow sense, I vote for whichever team has the best impact on the value-criteron for the value that I buy into in-round.

This means you don't necessarily have to win on your own case's value or your own case's VC. Probably you will find it easier to link your impacts to your own value and VC, but you can also concede to your opponent's value and link into their VC better than they do, or delink your opponent's VC from their value, or show that your case supports a VC that better ties into their value.

Congress:

I don't judge Congress nearly enough to have an in-depth paradigm, but it happens now and then. I will typically give POs top-3 if they successfully follow procedure and hold the room together.

Ranking is more based on gut feeling, but in a few words: did you speak compellingly (like you actually care), did you do good research to support your position, and did you take the initiative to speak, particularly when the room otherwise falls silent.

Hi - I've judged several tournaments over the last year and I love hearing different points of view.

First -- make sure I can understand you. If you go fast and mumble, I won't hear your points and will have a hard time following your arguments. Ideally, enumerate your points so I can follow them and keep track of them throughout the argument. If you go fast, make sure I can get your points! Otherwise, focus on what's most important and share that with me.

Second -- use your time! If you have 4 minutes, make the most of it.

Third -- Cite your sources. It is important that you do this so I can compare evidence. Then tell me why those points are important.

Fourth -- (but probably most important) Be respectful. Good sportsmanship and being kind is important to me. If you insult or talk down to the other team, I will not be impressed.

Lastly, listen to the other team.

Good luck!

This is my first time judging public forum debate so I am an inexperienced lay judge.

I will judge more on content, less on delivery. However, please remain respectful, especially during crossfire.

Do not run theory or other progressive arguments as I will not vote on them.

Please speak slowly and clearly.

Remember to incorporate evidence and warranting into all speeches.

Hi,

I am an intermediate judge ( flay) . It would be nice if you kept communications easy and straightforward (avoid using jargons).

Please be respectful to all participants. Most importantly.. have fun !!

Hello!

Here are some pointers to take into account when I judge a round of PF:

• Weighing is a MUST --> must be comparative
• Strengthen links WHILE de-linking your opponents points
• If you bring up a framework, carry it throughout ALL of your speeches
• I do allow off-time roadmaps
• Try not to be TOO repetitive --> I take note of as much as I can so if I catch a strong point, I will take that into account so there isn't a need to spend too much time going over the same point
• Make sure to refute directly --> In other words, try not to beat around the bush
• If you can, I strongly encourage you to front line, although I understand it may be difficult for Pro teams
• Logic AND Evidence

I understand that this may be a LOT to do in a round but try to do as many as possible. In addition, I will usually be judging based off of how well you did for the division you are in.

Good Luck!!!!

I consider myself a lay judge. I would appreciate if speakers can talk slowly with clarity. I consider evidence and impacts as important.

I will evaluate teams on the quality of the arguments actually made, not on their own personal beliefs, and not
on issues they think a particular side should have covered. I will assess the bearing of each argument on the
truth or falsehood of the assigned resolution. Also I tend not give much weightage to value based arguments.

Name: Lalit Kumar

Note:

I am a lay/parent judge. However, I do have knowledge of the public forum and how it works. As a parent of a public forum participant, I have seen many debates online. I have also researched the current topic in detail online.

I usually join a couple of minutes before the round to take questions about my paradigm. If you have clarity questions, please feel free to ask.

GENERAL:

1. Respect - First, and foremost, debate is about having fun and expressing your creativity! Please be respectful to your opponents and your judges.

2. Signposting - I strongly recommend signposting so your opponents understand what you are responding to.

3. Squirrelly contentions - If someone uses a squirrelly contention I would encourage them to have good defense/substance around it otherwise it will lead to deductions.

4. Strong/Stock contentions - I would give credit for a good stock contention even if your defense is found a bit lacking.

5. Theories and Ks - I am okay with these, but there needs to be details and substance around it, and you need to elaborate on how it correlates to the topic. Otherwise, it will lead to deductions.

6. Speech Speed - Please do not sacrifice clarity for speed; a clear enunciation is important to ensure the judge comprehends your contentions and rebuttals.

7. Time - Going overtime will lead to deductions. I would recommend timing yourself and your opponents. In case you notice your opponent is overtime, feel free to raise your zoom hand to highlight this.

8. Jargon - Jargon and abbreviations should be avoided and will lead to deductions. They cause a lack of clarity and can lead to misinterpretations.

REBUTTAL/SUMMARY/ FF:

1. Weighing - I am a fan of weighing, but I would encourage effectively providing terms like magnitude, scope, impact analysis, etc.

2. Evidence - Also, I am a fan of evidence-based arguments. Logical arguments lacking evidence can lead to deductions.

3. Extending - Make sure to extend the arguments and evidence from the case to the rebuttal, rebuttal to the summary, and the summary to the final focus.

4. Collapsing - As part of the summary, I would encourage collapsing, but if you prefer defending each contention, then you should be careful that you do not dilute your speech.

General

- Speak as fast as you want, but try not to spread. The words should be clear

- Focus on understanding of the topic and the depth at which one understands a topic

- I can time the speeches but prefer you please time yourselves

- Add me to the email chain: vishwas.manral@gmail.com

- Be respectful - don't say anything racist, homophobic, sexist, ableist, etc.

- I am a flay judge fyi

Arguments/ Debate etc.

I am fine with anything you run- K's, T, Theory, CP, etc. I enjoy seeing strategy and please don't blatantly contradict each other.

Case- I am fine with this too. Welcome to all args and do not prefer one over the other.

I love when people signpost, it helps me follow along with what you are saying in your speech. I also like organized rebuttals. Please make sure that you can your provide evidence to your opponents. If you fail to do so, we can immediately disregard what you are saying. Please also give logic to your args.

Offtime road-maps are also preferred.

Dropped args should not be brought back into the flow. You know the rest of the rules, so please follow them.

As far as framework goes, I am fine with anything as long as you are following your framework. Debating against framework- if the opposing team provides a better framework that works and proves why the other team's framework is irrelevant or etc. then I will consider that.

You run the show, so show me why you should win this debate. Impact weighing is greatly valued.

I won't flow cross, but if something big happens, tell me in your speech.

Im fine with disclosing cases as long as both teams are ok with it. If not, then please do not be forceful.

Tech>Truth, just as most judges would say.

Good luck, be kind, happy debate.

-Vishwas Manral

(He/Him)

There are six things I feel strongly about.

1. Evidence matters.

2. The aff should be topical.

3. Conditionality works.

4. Clarity is key.

5. CX is important.

6. Stock issues.

I read a lot of evidence and it is a main factor into my decisions in rounds. If you do not have quality evidence and you do not unpack and link it well that will not serve you well in my rounds.

Truth = evidence quality + technical proficiency. This means you need to not only ensure that your evidence is of high quality but the manner in which you present your evidence in the technical ways in which you go about conducting yourself in the round are both key to ensuring your success debating.

I seem to care more about the link than just about any other part of an argument and more than many other judges. I am a stickler for details. I need to see you clearly unpack the information you're using and showing me that you have a clear train of thought, a clear argument chain, and you actually understand what you are talking about and not just reading a card.

Stock issues matter. I should not have to explain this further for folks. People talk all the time about the role of the ballot. That role for me starts with stock issues.

Debaters who get high points from me are clear, concise, deeply knowledgeable about the topic, able to anticipate their opponent's arguments, good in CX, and clearly demonstrate meaningful preparation by developing new arguments or thoughtfully applying old ones to opposing strategies.

It should be noted for all who get me as a judge, explicit statements that are sexist, racist, etc. arguments will NEVER win my ballot. Also, students who are openly rude or exclude individuals in the round will NEVER win my ballot.

I will mostly be writing during the speeches. I don't flow crossfire. I can take some speed, but if I am looking up then you may be going too fast. Be kind and respectful as well.

I have competed in and coached PF, parli, extemp, and congress, and I'm familiar with almost all other events. I highly value strong speakers. I will evaluate speaking style in your points, and I do not preference cookie cutter speaking styles. Creative and dynamic speakers are often more convincing, so use this to your advantage. I can also see through convincing speaking styles and gesticulation to evaluate the content, so you need to be strong in both.

I am a flow judge. I appreciate line-by-line rebuttals, and I will take note if you drop subpoint rebuttals, so don't just carry taglines and unwarranted rebuttals. Debate is an opportunity to employ logic and reasoning, not just repetition and intuition. PF speaking times are not great venues for critical theory, but I'm comfortable evaluating theory if you have a strong grasp on what you're talking about. If you run a K, please don't assume that it will automatically win you the round- really think deeply about what you're trying to accomplish. Often a K is just a framework or an argument, so think about the intended outcome of your approach. Similarly, I am comfortable with PF cases that prioritize value or ethical principles. There are many ways to analyze a resolution.

You should provide a weighing mechanism and framework, and this should be carried through the round. Tell me how to evaluate the round. If your opponent offers a weighing mechanism and you provide no reason for me to doubt its validity, that will be the the way that I evaluate the round. If neither team tells me how to evaluate the round, I will run down my flow for dropped arguments, then evaluate winners in clash, then look at the strength of the original arguments. 

Brief roadmaps are okay if necessary and should be roughly 5 seconds. I will keep time, but please keep your own time so that I don't have to interrupt you. I also understand the need to call for cards- but it should be within reason. If your opponent asks for a card and it is revealed that your framing was blatantly misleading or the evidence just does not exist, that will reflect negatively on your speaker points and potentially my overall ballot. Be honest. It doesn't serve you to lie. 

Most importantly- I'm excited that you've chosen to participate in debate. Please be courteous to one another and take seriously the opportunity and responsibility to discuss issues that impact real people every day.

I'm a Public Forum debater at Lakeland High School in Yorktown Heights, NY.

If you still have any questions after reading this, please feel free to ask.

Email if you need an email chain or questions after the round: izabella.wid@gmail.com

And if you don't have time to read this - TLDR; I flow, explain arguments, have evidence, keep time, and have fun!

Flowing

I will be flowing everything except crossfire. Use crossfire as a way to clear confusion or build upon what will be in an actual speech. Emphasize what you really want to have flowed.

Signposting, and telling me what you are addressing, does help.

Speed

In terms of speed, I do not care anymore. Keep in mind, it becomes difficult to understand what you're saying for not only me but for your opponents. I will struggle flowing it. Make sure to emphasize and enunciate appropriately.

Types of Arguments

I generally prefer well-warranted impacts.

As long as you explain well I can handle obscure arguments, but nothing major. I am not all-knowing, sometimes things do not make sense.

Dates

I prefer you read the year for your cards.

Evidence

Evidence is not everything but I find it important.

If you misinterpret evidence, read from authors or sources that are clearly unreliable, or make an argument that isn’t backed up by evidence at all, that lowers the traction of the argument, especially if the other team calls you out on it.

Please explain your arguments in a sensible way that I can vote on.

Summary and Final Focus

You don't have to extend your defense from the rebuttal into your Summary but if your opponent has made massive turns, you should put up some defense. In Final Focus, please weigh. You should be the ones telling me throughout and prominently in final, my reason for decision.

No new arguments in Final Focus.

Decorum

Funny jokes and witty puns are welcomed, but be chill about it. Getting heated is fine but keep things civil, intelligent, and respectful.

If you say "judge" I will look at you with anticipation for something you want on the flow above all.

Prep

I can keep your prep time or speech time if necessary but I would prefer you do that yourselves.

Further, if you go overtime I am fine with finishing a sentence or two but I won't flow evidence over time.

Miscellaneous

I couldn't care less about what you do before the round. You could throw a chair out the window and I won't take off speaks (but I will testify against you in court).

How you debate means more to me than what you wear.

It is your debate, not mine. Do you. Just stay organized and tell me where and why to vote.

Feel free to ask me anything about your individual performance, or for any debate-related advice. At the end of the round, I would not mind if you showed me your own perspective of the round, I would want to help you guys improve as debaters but I also want to improve as your judge. If you think I did something unfair feel free to let me know.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Finally, have fun. You guys are doing something that takes a lot of effort and willpower, so just enjoy yourselves and hopefully, you'll remember these times fondly.

Parent judge.

I recently started judging public forum debate and consider myself an amateur "parent judge."

MORE IMPORTANTLY, I AM NOT A NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER!!!

So I ask the debaters to speak SLOWLY and CLEARLY if I happen to be the judge assigned to your round/flight, simply because: the more I understand you, the more I am convinced by you, and therefore, the more chance I will vote for you.