Majewski,+Jonas

My name is Jonas Majewski and I competed in International Extemporaneous Speaking and Public Forum for three years at Monte Vista High School in Danville, California. I participated extensively in debate on both the state and national circuits, particularly, my senior year. I'm currently a student at UC Berkeley double majoring in Business and Economics.

__**Public** **Forum**__

As far as cases go, I'm pretty much open to anything as long as you provide quantitative/qualitative evidence backing it up. Frameworks should be logical and explained very clearly. If you run something out of left field make sure you have very good warrants to I'm fine with speed as long as your delivery doesn't suffer as a result--if you start stumbling over words because you can't think as fast as you're speaking your speaker points will suffer accordingly.

That being said, simply dumping evidence onto my flow will **NOT** get you my vote. I expect you to fully weigh all your contentions and establish very clear links between warrants and impacts. If you run an absurd impact with no clear evidence/link I will ignore it.

As for evidence, you should be weighing that as well. Don't expect me to figure out why your evidence on a particular issue is better, but rather tell me how the evidence is more accurate/irrelevant to today's round. If you're going to cite a study you should also have the methodology carded just in case you get asked for it. If you don't I'll still probably consider the evidence, but it will have far less weight in any decision. I hate having to call for evidence after round, but I will if there is an unresolved dispute. Make sure that all your cards and articles are easily accessible so that we don't have to wait will you sift through a mountain of papers mid-round. I also really like it when you number your responses to a contention during rebuttal speeches.

I personally hate it when judges vote on courtesy so don't expect me to, but your speaker points will suffer as a result of excessive rudeness. As for the Final Focus, make sure you're giving me two or three solid voting issues and are being very clear on why you think you won the round. One more note--if you read new evidence during your Final Focus I'll not only throw it out, but most likely drop you on my ballot as well. Sliming is my absolute biggest pet peeve in debate and I will lose all respect for you as debaters if you do it.

I will vote off whatever I have on my flow, but make sure that you also remain persuasive and poised throughout the round for speaker points.

Good luck!


 * __LD__**

I personally never competed in LD, and am a far too traditional judge for most kids on the circuit. I can flow speed fairly well, but don't expect me to vote for you because of some argument I didn't catch. If you run theory or K's they better make sense and link. Ultimately try to remain somewhat topical during the debate, as I will consider that in my decision.

__**Policy**__

I can't say that I've ever even watched a full policy round, so I'm probably not the judge you want to have for this event.