Pairings just came out, the round begins in 5 minutes, and you don't want to read the full paradigm version: Be nice, be engaging, be funny, have a unique persona. Warranting and weighing is VERY VERY important. Do not be rude (it really aint that deep).

I value strong argumentation, (respectful) clash between, and debaters who have a unique persona (especially debaters who lean into their sense of humor). From the first neg onward, clash and substantive refutation is a MUST. While I'm mainly looking at the quality of your arguments, it's also important that you speak clearly and keep everyone interested. Don't be afraid to take risks and let your personality shine through. I want to be entertained!! During cross-examination, just keep it respectful and avoid getting too loud.

Back up your speech with evidence and warrants. Don’t just vent to me about your thoughts on this bill or how you think other speeches suck. Simple arguments (especially comparative arguments) with strong warranting usually win. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE be nice to eachother. I really don’t want to see a bunch of angry highschoolers yelling at eachother about sanctions on Cuba at 8 a.m. on a Saturday morning. Be enthusiast and be entertaining.

Do not be dependent on your legal pad. While this is congressional DEBATE, public speaking and engagement is extremely important. Making good points will not be nearly as effective if you do not deliver them well. Think of it this way: never in my life have I heard someone say, “yeah, Obama really won that debate on the flow.” people determine if politicians win the debate based off of both the content they deliver and, more importantly, HOW they deliver. The heart of congress is persuading the ordinary person. So, act as if I am a first time parent judge from rural minnesota who has never even heard of congressional debate before.

Be spontaneous and engaging. Im a sucker for good ORIGINAL rhetoric…don’t just tell me that democracy dies in darkness…put time and thought into your rhetoric.

Do NOT just dump evidence without actual analysis. I'd rather see thoughtful analysis that explains your points clearly than a bunch of card dumping. In new york state finals my sophomore year, I read a speech with 17 cards and statistics in it…do NOT be that guy. Remember, warrants are key; your arguments need to make sense on their own, not just rely on evidence. Be clear and to the point in your reasoning.

Take risks. I HIGHLY (like very very highly) reward when speakers stand up for speeches when they have to (e.g. flipping on an uneven debate or prepping a sponsorship last minute).

POs: be fast, fair, and efficient. your job is to lead the chamber, not JUST calling on people and dealing with parliamentary procedure. try to get us out of session as fast as possible. a good po will be ranked top 4.

ANY homophobia, racism, or any misogyny will get you INSTANTLY dropped. Also, do not tokenize the trauma of minorities for the sake of “pathos.” If you want to know what I mean by that, read this: tinyurl.com/tokenizationarticle

If you have any questions, feel free to email me (owcasey@packer.edu).

Ahoy!

I'm Andy Choy from Lovejoy High School in Texas. Contrary to its etymology, Lovejoy has no love, no joy, and is barely a high school, but debate keeps me alive.

There are a couple of things you should never do in round. Being derogatory or blatantly abusive will result in a DFL/loss and zero speaker points. If you have any safety concerns, please feel free to inform me if comfortable. Providing absolutely no evidence will also likely lead to a loss and zero speaks. Debates should typically be topical. If the content of your speech is three contextless minutes of Dhar Mann videos, you'll probably want to reprep that speech.

"Good luck, don't suck." - Jake Cosio

Congressional

Argumentation

• It's okay if there isn't one, but a concise thesis statement outlining your argumentation helps your rank.
• Provide a causal explanation for your empirical evidence. Tell me how your evidence proves your claim. It strengthens your line of reasoning.
• Cite evidence! "An assumption is an assumption because the assumption doesn't have evidence. That's why it's an assumption!" - Tommy Nichol
• Evidence is best cited by organisation and exact date if possible. Credibility matters, so feel free to include author names and credentials in appositives.
• Speeches should build on the session's existing debate. If yours does not, adapt it! There is always something to contribute.
• The way you structure your speech does not matter to me at all. In contrast, how convincing your argumentation is does.
• You need not confine your speech to the idea of constructive, rebuttal, and crystal. A strong speech often includes aspects of all three.
• I hold questioning in high regard because it is the only time you can immediately defend your argumentation against rebuttals. Do not question with the intent to affirm your own side. Number of questions < constructiveness of questions

Rhetoric

• Pirating your speech from other debaters => "You are without doubt the worst pirate I've ever heard of." => Getting dropped
• Do not glue your face to your speech pad for the entire duration of your speech.
• Using AGDs relatable to the topic of debate helps your rank.

Notes

• I award speech points 3 or higher as long as your speech is not abusive.
• Congressional debate =/= congressional politicking

Public Forum

Email for the chain (but not for the spam): andyc30503@gmail.com

Tech > Truth, but I will not vote for your argumentation if I cannot understand or verify it.

Consider me a flow judge. Please disclose. I more often than not will have enough topic knowledge, but please don't assume I know everything. Speed is acceptable, but don't spread outright. I'll let you know if your pacing is too fast. Clash with your opponent's case is expected during rebuttal, summary, and final focus. Passionate delivery is rare in PF, so a little passion is appreciated.

+0.5 speaks for taking notes during the RFD

+0.5 speaks if you play a national anthem before round that I fail to identify

Hi, I'm Ashish Kashyap, and I'm a junior at William Fremd High School, in my 3rd year of Congressional Debate. I've been competing in the ICDA and TOC circuit for a few years, have won a few things and all that. Hope this paradigm helps. My email is ashdakash@gmail.com if you have any questions. Feel free to ask anything.

General thoughts:

In terms of judging, I don't have much experience, but all of my views as a judge reflect what I feel about Congress as a whole, which I can easily talk about. My debate "philosophy" came from something a basketball coach told me many years ago.

"Take only what the game gives you".

To me, the most important thing in Congress is to be able to adapt all of your "prep" and pre-prepared rhetoric and such, and be ready to completely change everything you had. It’s very obvious when someone hasn't adjusted for the round properly, and it really stands out in a negative light. Be ready to change, adapt, and even learn new things in chamber. The best speeches I've ever seen, happen when people have an extemporaneous response to the ongoings of the round.

Delivery/Presentation:

To me, a speaker's presentation of their arguments can be the difference-maker. I heavily heavily value strong delivery, with passion, and skillful tone variation. Feel free to be as loud as you want. Just make sure to give your volume a meaning within the context of what you're saying, otherwise you're just yelling at the chamber. I recognize that delivery is a skill that not everybody has down, and that's OK. I will never penalize for a speaker who's presenting strong, unique arguments for not having entrancing delivery. But if you can effectively convey your ideas, and pair that with skillful presentation, you will be rewarded. Don’t forget that your delivery is the best place to try out new things, new styles, new voices, and I really value this when it's done well.

Argumentation/Structure:

The best way to get my 1 with argumentation is to bring a game changing take. Find arguments that will rip the debate a new one, instead of relying on things we’ve both heard a million times. In this day and age, with TikTok and YouTube being so popular, everybody’s entertainment driven. So am I. I will be massively entertained if you present arguments that nobody else would even think of. And don’t do your amazing argument a disservice by not connecting it back to the round and your opposition. But when you do refute, I’m not impressed with refuting weaker arguments. Pick on someone your size. If your argument is truly round winning, then you should be refuting the strongest arguments of the other side. This doesn’t mean name dropping, this means going through their links, and showing me why they do not work anymore. Once you’ve done this, explain why your argument matters in multiple contexts, and why it wins the round. Many debaters drop some crazy cards, but don’t do anything to explain why anyone should care. When that happens, what’s being said isn’t really an “argument”, it’s just a statement.

For structure, I don’t know how else to say this, but do whatever the hell you want. I don’t care if you have one point, two points, three points, bloc, no block, whatever it may be, do not feel limited to the things you’ve been taught. At the end of the day, I’m just looking for a fluid organization that’s clearly conveyed, and the possibilities to accomplish that are endless. Get creative, do it properly, and it’ll be rewarded.

For sponsorships, I have a simple set of expectations. Frame the context properly, and jumpstart the affirmation by tying your set of arguments to the context. I don’t care about having or not having pre-refs. Don’t shy away from the sponsor, I think good sponsors always stand out in muddled debates.

PO:

I don’t think I’m capable of giving a PO a 1 rank. I’ll be honest, I’m a really bad PO. Like historically bad (But I’ve still been in enough rounds to know when you’ve messed up). In terms of Congress, I don’t understand why having a student PO is necessary. So as a combination of those two things, I don’t rank them as 1. That being said, if you’re the PO, make minimal mistakes, be fair and relatively efficient, and I’ll rank you higher than the break cutoff for the round. For outrounds, I’ll expect more efficiency and almost no mistakes, but I’ll properly reward you for that.

Also, not having a personality and being “boring” as a PO won’t knock you down, but please, make jokes, have some fun as a PO (while not sacrificing your efficiency). Rounds are long, people get tired, so PO’s with a likable personality will always stand out.

Questioning:

I take note of questioning. Consistent good questioning and good composure and responses can move the needle. Both the question in question, and the response. With shorter blocks, be concise, and don’t add liberties or congratulations. Get straight to the point. Cut straight into the arguments and the links. Remember to be civil, but I’m fine with heated back and forths. Passion is great!

Hey, I'm Enan! I'm a rising junior at American Heritage High School! I've competed in Congress for about 2 and a half years now, and am still on the circuit! If you're reading this, you're probably doing something EIF related, and lwk that's goated!

The golden rule: Be yourself! There are thousands of ways to communicate to me an argument, but the best way will be the one you did yourself. Not your coach. Not your friend. You.

For Congress,

TLDR; Don’t give arguments that you think will make you stand out, or are unique, or ones that you like. Give arguments that win the round for your side. Make the most impactful argument that gives your side a lot of ground, and murder the most impactful argument made on the other side. Lead the charge for your advocacy and that’s how you’ll get my 1.

The longer version:

1. Explain why. Everyone makes arguments and claims, but not a lot of them even tell me why it's true. "Pass this bill because lowering the minimum wage increases jobs." Good, but why? Explaining why is warranting, and I will never buy an argument if you don't do it. And if you don't do it, you will not break in my ranks.

2. Don't give an argument the round won't care about. You're a competitor in this round, meaning you need to adapt to the round and address arguments made in it. You need to make arguments that win your side the round, whether it'd be giving your side a very offensive and strong point or taking away a strong point from the other side. I don't want a unique argument that won't do much for the round, I need you to interact with the round.

3. Debate. Congress is not designed to be a “fully prepared beforehand speech” event; you MUST react to what’s happening in the debate. You cannot go into a round with a speech prepped and give it making no changes (unless you're the sponsor). Somewhere in the speech, you need to REFUTE.

4. Sound passionate when you speak. I will never buy an argument if you don't sound like you care. You get 4 minutes to speak in a 2 hour round, so use it as an opportunity for me to get to know you. Use those 4 minutes to show me you really care.

5. Impact. Follow rule 1 and you've explained to me why the argument is true. Now I need to know why I should care about it. If your argument saves lives, mention that and be emotional. When I'm at the end comparing arguments and speakers, I look for the arguments that I like the most, and I like arguments that move my heart.

Some more general notes:

No disrespect or racism. If I see it, I will make you last.

If you know how to weigh, do it. Do my job for me in my ballot.

Evidence ethics is important. Please source your evidence in case I find it fishy. Source name, date, and year is good.

If you think someone is lying regarding evidence, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE call them out. It really gets on my nerve to see honest debaters lose on the flow to cheaters who fake evidence; so do it.

Generic intros you can use for anything sucks. Intros that are specific to the topic are cool. Intros that are funnier are the best. You'll do better if you have a good one.

POs always rank T7, unless you're seriously bad. If you want to place T3 as a PO, then cut out the extra verbiage and speak less. And if you want to be say some trigger warning message early, make it quick. It shouldn’t be a whole darn speech.

If you need to flip, I understand. Just don't give a bad speech. Think of it like this: If you don't flip and it's good, you get 100. if you flip and it's good, you get extra credit. if you don't flip and it's bad, you don't do good. if you flip and it's bad, you don't do good either.

Good humor is rewarded. Bad humor, I look the other way. At least you tried, right?

Finally, have fun! That's the right way to win.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

For PF,

I don't judge it often, but I'm not a complete newbie. I'm a lay judge who needs you to go slow (I think spreading is magic and yall are wizards n witches for it). Also, theory kind of sucks. If you come to a debate round about student loan debt, and I here you complaining that the fact that your competitor is wearing shoes and that's bad for the environment, like cmon bro. Now if you reason for why the theory is acceptable, I'll care. I think disclosure is poopoo tho.

This might piss you off but truth > tech most of the time. Don't give 5 crappy arguments and expect to win by saying "They didn't respond to this one." Cringe.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

For any other event,

Make jokes, be funny, and be engaging. I don't know other events too well, but I'm sure I can catch on. Thanks for reading!

Hi! I’m Omkar, and I currently compete in congressional debate at William Fremd HS.

Congressional debate is about presenting effective arguments that further ongoing debate. I basically judge based off that sentence. For presentation, I value uniqueness - be yourself, not whatever congressional debater you've watched a video of. At the end of the day, you'll always sound more believable and interesting by leaning into your style. The arguments you present need to be accurate and effective. I expect clear warranting - sources are good, but stats need to be paired with an understandable reason why. Finally, you need to explain how the arguments you make interact with the debate. Whether that be through weighing, delinking, or turning, it's not a good Congress speech unless it's clearly aware of the round it's being given in. That being said, this doesn't mean I will rank down sponsorships. I understand that the sponsor has a different job than the rest of the round, and I will rate a good sponsorship just as high, if not higher, than I would rate a good mid-round or late-round speech. A sponsor needs to adequately set up the status quo as it relates to the bill, establish the key frameworks that the round will revolve around, and have plenty of offense showing why the aff is the winning side.

Outside of speeches, I value questions that advance the debate through delinking and weighing. If you ask a good question and the speaker is consistently avoiding it, don't waste your 30 seconds. Move on - I will notice when a good question wasn't answered properly. I will rank good POs at minimum whatever is needed to break: “good” means the chamber runs quickly because the PO keeps control and doesn't make mistakes. Be respectful and kind to your fellow debaters, and have fun!