Park,+Ryan

Bay Area Urban Debate League (BAUDL)

Background: I debated on the national circuit for 4 years in high school, but then was away from debate for a few years. I've been judging regularly for the last 3 years: mostly for BAUDL, with a handful of national circuit tournaments too.

Speed: I'm OK with speed as long as you're clear. I'll shout "clearer" or "slower" but only once. If you're still unclear, I won't pester you, but I won't be able to flow or follow your arguments. I've only seen a few rounds this year, so please be very explicit when using topic-specific terminology or acronyms.

Evidence: I love specific evidence. A specific link is a lot more credible than a generic one. If you extend and explain your evidence throughout the round, it will give your cards credibility and weight. If you don't, and I have to ask for cards after the round, I'll make my own decisions about their quality. You may not want that.

Argumentation: Whenever you make an argument, explain why it matters, especially as you get into the rebuttals. Rebuttals should be a balance of telling me the "big picture" story, and extending/arguing specifics that impact that big picture.

Kritiks: I'm less comfortable with kritik debates than traditional advantages/disadvantages/counterplans, but I'll vote on whatever arguments you present. I expect the same type of argumentation in kritik debates as in other arguments. A kritik should have a very specific link and very clear implications. It's especially important to make good explanations on kritiks (why each argument matters!) since I may not know the literature as well as some other judges.

T and Theory: Make sure you articulate the implication of your argument -- why it matters. If there's no in-round abuse, you're going to have a very high burden of proof on this. It's also a lot easier for me to vote for an interpretation backed by fair standards and bright lines.