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.

Longer version:

A. Fulfill your role. If you’re the sponsor, tell me the problem and tell me your solution. If you’re the first negation, give me the stock/common reason for why the sponsor is bad. If you’re early, give and make arguments. If you’re in the middle, do the perfect mix of making and refuting arguments. If you’re late, stop making arguments, refute and crystallize them. Summarize why you won, and weigh impacts.Simple formula, but if you do this, you will rank.

B. 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.

- When I judge, remember, I’m comparing arguments and impacts. If you gave a game-changing argument and are getting refuted by everyone, I’m going to like you a lot more than someone who gave a “unique argument”

C. Warrant bucko. Don’t warrant an argument, and I won’t buy it. Don’t just say something and leave me wondering: but why? Give an argument and explain why. Then give me evidence. Then…

D. Impact.Follow rule C 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. This is the perfect structure (CWDAI FAN HERE!)

Some more general notes:

No disrespect or discrimination or I drop you.

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 T6, unless you're seriously bad. If you want to place T3 as a PO, then cut out the extra verbiage and speak less. Good POs are quick and keep to themselves, watch Zach Wu if you need an example.

Flipping rewards you if you do ok/good. If you do bad, uh, not much I can do dawg.

Rehash is a skill issue.

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 pretty goofy fusion of lay/flow.I can deal with speed, but if you’re overly reliant on spreading, drop a speech doc and I’ll probably be okay. I draw out args, rebuttals not as much.

Theory kind of funky ngl. 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. If I think it is relevant (not that hard to convince me), it probably will win. I think disclosure is poopoo tho.

Tech>truth but don’t be stupid about it. As in, don’t expect to drop 5 goofy args and expect to win when the opp doesn’t respond to 1. Win the event the right way.

Weighing is important; do it in the 2nd half and go slow for it.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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 everyone! I'm Pranika Kumar, an incoming junior from Edina, MN. I've been competing in Congressional Debate and Extemporaneous Speaking for about three years now.

For Congressional Debate, there are a few key things from me:

Argumentation: I want to see clear and consistent warranting throughout your speech, regardless of when you're speaking. Whether you're on solvency, impacts, or engaging with clash, everything should be soundly warranted from start to finish. Additionally, I don't want to see rehashed or prewritten speeches in later rounds, your speech should always refute, weigh, and engage with the ongoing debate, moving it forward in an insightful way. That said, I don't devalue speaking early in the round; my biggest thing is that you do your job at the point in the cycle when you're speaking and give the debate what it needs. If you do that, you'll always earn a rank on my ballot.

Delivery and Presentation: Use emotional variation in your tone to reflect the content of your speech. Having a dynamic voice not only helps you hold attention but also emphasizes the importance of your arguments. Don’t speak too quickly, and most importantly, let your personality shine through in your speeches. Your personality is what makes your speech memorable. Be true to yourself in your delivery, experiment with unique speech structures or styles, and don’t be afraid to incorporate humor or creativity that can help you stand out. Lastly, own your speech, if you don’t believe you’ve got the winning argument, no judge will. Confidence is key.

POs: Please be fast, efficient, and respectful to competitors. If you make a mistake, quickly address it and move on rather than letting it linger over the rest of the round. If you do a good job, I will rank you in my T4.

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!

Hi! I'm a senior at FAU HS and this is my 7th year competing in congressional debate.

Debate is not a game
You're usually discussing matters of life and death -- this entire activity is a dialectic about how to improve the nation and the world. Your rounds are about more than just getting the 1 or a W. Similarly, debate affects the lives of people who participate in it. Success can mean scholarships or admittance to great colleges. Please don't trivialize how important that can be for people.

"Principally!!!" is a trendy new filler word in congress
I WILL mark you down for saying this. It adds nothing to your content and does not make you sound smarter. Also a nice little litmus test to see if you actually read my paradigm lol.

Speeches & style -- I'm judging you based on the result, not the process.
"Constructive," "rebuttal," and "crystallization" speeches are a social construct! They are a lens to understand your role as a speaker, not a strict blueprint for a speech. I don't care if you use CWDI, block structure, or just freestyle. I don't care if you use a legal pad or an iPad or nothing. These are just your tools -- I'm judging you based on the result, not the process.

If I've heard your exact speech before I will literally drop you even if it's the best speech in the round. Do not pawn other people's prep off as your own.

No one knows how to weigh in congress so please weigh.

Empirical citations =/= Causal analysis. Telling me why your arguments are true and why they matter are different things entirely. Don't mix em up!

In terms of congressional debate, most rounds have two issues: the debate is surface-level yet pretty damn confusing. I love speakers who can cut through to the heart of a topic and implicate that back to the debate as a whole.

I appreciate original, novel, and funny rhetoric. Try to distinguish yourself!

Delivery & presentation
Presentation is necessary to help you get your point across. If you neglect presentation that will reflect on your overall performance.

OK so people have started using iPads a lot more since I first wrote this paradigm. For context, I don't know anyone who has been using an iPad for longer than I. If you use an iPad, you need to look and sound like a fluent speaker with a legal pad. Bulky cases will weaken your performance. Having to hold the iPad in front of your face the whole time will weaken your performance. Pad dependency, as always, will seriously count against you. The iPad is a tool, not a crutch.

Laptops are a flat out no. You won't get a rank from me speaking off a laptop.

Love padless performances, they're impressive af.

Presiding officers
POs are the worst part of congress. There is no way to fairly rank a room of speakers against someone whose entire job is to update a spreadsheet and bang a gavel. If I had it my way, every round would have a tournament-provided PO. But don't worry. I have a fair way to evaluate POs regardless of anything else: Bad POs will be dropped, good POs will at least get a rank good enough to advance to the next round.

A good PO is fast, fair, aware of parliamentary procedure & tournament-specific rules, and serves as a leader and problem-solver in the round.

I rank POs in final rounds differently. I don't think POs deserve to champ unless they do something brilliant or demonstrate exceptional leadership. I've never seen a final round where I thought the PO deserved to champ, even though they often do. I will never give a PO the 1 in a final round. Think that's unfair? Not really. POs often champ without getting a single 1. If I'm judging a debate tournament, I'd rather give the 1 to a debater.

If you're a PO and get no feedback from me, that means you did a good job. Fret not.

Other stuff
"Automatic previous question after 3 speeches on the same side" is not a rule unless we're at TOC or tournaments that specifically use TOC rules.

Speech equity is great and important, but there is no such thing as a formal base system. I have nothing against someone getting the chance to speak more than everyone else if it keeps debate going and fresh.

Don't yell or be mean in cross-ex. Avoid talking over eachother. If someone starts yelling or talking over you in cross-ex, let them. I promise it's more strategic to let them look bad and perhaps call them out for it, compared to fighting fire with fire. That being said, questioners AND answers should keep questions AND answers concise.

I see all the politicking for what it really is