Judge Philosophies
Sean Cox-Marcellin - MJC
Adrian Cuevas - DVC
n/a
Adriana McCain - Chico
Alan Fishman - DVC
n/a
America Yamaguchi - San Jose State
Ana Comeseno - CCSF
Andre Roundtree - MJC
Anvita Patwardhan - S@B
n/a
Avesta Sabetian - San Jose State
Bear Unruh - MJC
Bobby John - Chabot
Brad Svinth - SFSU
n/a
CJ Bush - Columbia
n/a
Chase Cunha - Columbia
n/a
Clayton Lynch - Butte
n/a
Cody Peterson - MJC
Dennis Guardado - CCSF
Desiny Carter - CSUSB
n/a
Elicia Locke - DVC
n/a
Elyse Dooley - Columbia
n/a
Ericka Guevarra - SFSU
n/a
James Rogers - SRJC
Jared Anderson - Sac State
<p>NFA-LD judging philosophy</p> <p>I have been coaching and judging debate for about 10 years now. I've primarily coached CEDA/NDT debate but I am also very familiar with Parli. My basic philosophy is that it is the burden of the debaters to compare their arguments and explain why they are winning. I will evaluate the debate based on your criteria as best I can. I will try to keep this brief and answer any questions you may have...</p> <p>NFA-LD rules - I have read and understand the rules and I will "enforce" them if arguments are made. I will not intervene, you need to argue the violation. My preference is to use the least punitive measure allowed by the rules to resolve any violations...in other words, my default is to reject the argument, not the team. In some instances that won't make sense, so I'll end up voting on it.</p> <p>Speed - I understand that this is one of the rules. It is also a rule that makes very little sense, is written poorly, and difficult to interpret. I take a good flow and I suspect that there are very few folks in LD that can test my pen. That being said, I am not encouraging any one to try to spread people out. That should never be the goal of debate. If there is a legitimate concern raised about the rate of delivery from somebody, I will consider the argument, but it needs to be well developed and explained. </p> <p>Topicality - is a voter. </p> <p>Kritiks - must link to the action of the plan. Winning "doesn't link to the plan" will function the same as "no link" for me.</p> <p>Basic Logistics:</p> <p>Prep - The prep clock stops when you stop prepping! When the clock stops, everyone needs to stop prepping. Don't tell me you are ready and then look for more cards or that you have to find your flow. Prep is done when you are ready to speak. If you are paperless, I will stop prep when the flash drive is in the other teams hand or the email is sent. </p> <p>Evidence Sharing - be adults about this. If you want a paperless debate, awesome. I think it works the best, however...get your tech together. If both debaters are prepared for paperless that is great, if you are providing a viewing computer it better be of a quality that allows your opponent to actually view the evidence without wasting their prep time. If the debate is on paper, pass down cards as you read them and avoid bickering about who has access to the evidence. The person who is prepping should be in control of the evidence.</p> <p>Disclosure - unless specifically forbidden, I will disclose my decision after the debate and give you brief feedback. Since we need to keep the tournament on time I will keep my comments brief. I'm happy to answer additional questions at a later time.</p>
Jared Morin - CCSF
Jasmine Itliong - CCSF
Kanako Otani - Chico
Kevin McDermott-Swanson - SRJC
Lemar Karimi - San Jose State
Lilly Gage - MJC
Macey Goodrich - MJC
Mariel Cruz - Santa Clara
<p>Schools I've coached/judged for: Santa Clara Univerisity, Cal Lutheran University, Gunn High School, Polytechnic School </p> <p>I judge both Policy and Parlia debate. I just both events pretty similarly. I do have a few specific notes about Parlia debate at the bottom. Parlia debaters, be sure to read the notes at the very bottom as well. </p> <p>Background: I was a policy debater for Santa Clara University for 5 years. I also helped run/coach the SCU parliamentary team, so I know a lot about both styles of debate. This is my second year coaching, but I have seen a lot of rounds and know a lot about debate.</p> <p>I haven’t done much research on either the college or high school policy topic, so be sure to explain everything pretty clearly.</p> <p>I’m good with speed, but be clear. I’ll let you know if you aren’t. However, if you’re running theory, try to slow down a bit so I can flow everything really well. Also, be sure to sign-post, especially if you're going fast, otherwise it gets too hard to flow. </p> <p>I like all types of arguments, disads, kritiks, theory, whatever you like. I like Ks but I’m not an avid reader of K literature, so you’ll have to make clear explanations, especially when it comes to the alt. Even though the politics DA was my favorite, I did run quite a few Ks when I was a debater, but I don't work with Ks as much as I used to, so I'm not super familiar with every K, but I've seen enough Ks that I have probably seen something similar to what you're running. Just make sure everything is explained well enough. </p> <p>I tend to think that the aff should defend a plan and the resolution and affirm something (since they are called the affirmative team), but if you think otherwise, be sure to explain why you it’s necessary not to. I’ll side with you if necessary. I also think conditionality and topicality are pretty awesome. I usually side with reasonability for T, and condo good, but there are many exceptions to this. I'll vote on theory and T if I have to. </p> <p>I like looking at the big picture as much as the line by line, so make sure to make those type of arguments as well, ie impact analysis and comparative claims. </p> <p>I’m cool with paperless debate. I was a paperless debater for a while myself. I don’t time exchanging flashdrives, but don’t abuse that time. Please be courteous and as timely as possible. </p> <p> </p> <p>PARLIA Debate</p> <p>I only went to a hand full of parlia tournaments as a debater, but I helped coach the parlia team during my entire debate career, and I coach both policy and parlia. And, as a policy debater, I'm familiar with all your arguments (since most of them come from policy). I'm also really good with speed, since I had to flow fast rounds all the time for policy. Just be sure to sign post so I can flow properly. </p> <p>Since the structure for parlia is a little different, I don't have as a high of a threshold for theory and T as I do when I judge policy, which means I am more likely to vote on theory and T in parlia rounds than in policy rounds. This doesn't mean I'll vote on it every time, but I think these types of arguments are a little more important in parlia, especially for topics that are kinda vague and open to interpretation. </p> <p>I'm pretty familiar with debate jargon, but after judging some parlia rounds, I've come to realize that the some terms have slightly different interpretations in parlia than in policy, so you should err on the side of explaining and elaborating instead of just using these terms. For example, explain what "dispo" means, or explain your "try or die" situation, etc. </p> <p>For any other argument, I judge it the way I would judge policy, so you can look to the information above if you want to know anything else. Also, feel free to ask me any other questions you may have. </p>
Matthew Zupko - San Jose State
<p>I’ll flow anything you tell me, just be organized and let me know where you are. You need to tell me why your impact is good (or bad)- I’m going to try not to assume anything. I really appreciate solid link scenarios, and evidence with good warrants can win you the round. Speed is fine, but please be respectful if the other team calls slow or clear. I like to hear about the topic, but if you run procedurals and provide good warrants I’ll vote on it. I prefer proven abuse but it’s not necessary to win the position. Weigh out and evaluate impacts, because if you don’t I have to do it myself and you probably don’t want that. Timeframe, probability and magnitude are what I’m accustomed to hearing and I will usually put the most weight into probability unless you can show me why I shouldn’t.</p>
Matthew Gloria-Dalton - San Jose State
Megan Chatelain - MJC
Meghon Everett - CSUSB
n/a
Milo Munoz-Valverde - SFSU
n/a
Miranda Konoplisky - DVC
n/a
N'dea Johnson - DVC
n/a
Pablo Ramirez - SFSU
n/a
Patricia Harris-Jenkinson - Los Rios
n/a
Patrick Mwamba - Chabot
Ryan Wallace - CSUEB
n/a
Salma Hegab - Chico
Sean Funcheon - Chabot
Shannan Troxel-Andreas - Butte
n/a
Shauna Murnane - Chico
Stephen Ban - Butte
Suzanne Ruckle - Yuba
n/a
Tyffani Upton-Benton - Los Rios
n/a
Victoria Luckner - CSUSB
n/a