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 not do in round. Being derogatory or blatantly abusive will gift you a drop/loss and 0 speaker points. If you have any safety concerns, please feel free to inform me. Providing 0 reliable evidence will likely also earn a drop/loss and 0 speaks. Debates should typically be topical. If your speech is 3 contextless minutes of Dhar Mann videos, you should probably reprep your speech.

"Good luck. Don't suck." - Mr. Cosio

Congressional

Argumentation

• A concise thesis statement outlining your argumentation improves your rank.
• "An assumption is an assumption because the assumption doesn't have evidence. That's why it's an assumption!" - Tommy Nichol
• Causal explanations for your empirical evidence improve your rank. Show me why your evidence proves your claim.
• Evidence citations should include organisation and date. Credibility matters, so please include author name, author credentials, and exact date if possible.
• Speeches should build on the 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. How convincing your argumentation is does.
• You need not confine your speech to the constructive, rebuttal, and crystal categories.
• If you weigh well, expect me to rank well.

Rhetoric

• Stealing rhetoric from other debaters => you're throwing.
• Do not glue your face to your speech pad, practically or literally, for your entire speech.
• Using AGDs relatable to the debate topic improves your rank.
• If you use cliché chess rhetoric, see my reaction as I drop you.
• If you say "the road to hell is paved with good intentions," I hope you know the road to a low rank is paved with poor rhetoric.

Questioning

• I highly regard questioning because it is the only time you can immediately defend your argumentation against refutations.
• Question amount < question constructiveness, do not question to affirm your own side.
• If your question is not a question, your rank is not a 1.

Notes

• I award 3 or higher speech points 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 argumentation I cannot understand or verify.

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 I fail to identify

Hello!!! I have competed in Congressional debate for nearly 3 years and have seen competitors at every single level. Debate is extremely competitive and it is important to have fun while you do it. Good luck!

Congress:

I understand that Congress is a lengthy format, but it is important to be engaged throughout the entire debate (Ask questions during each piece of legislation). Also stay hydrated :D

Here are some simple things:
-Maintain decorum (talking out of turn, yelling during questioning, speaking over your competitors)HEAVILY FROWNED UPON... -Ask judges if they are ready and make sure they know who you are (show placard). -If the debate is one-sided, flipping would be preferable (shows that you are well-prepared) -AVOID OBVIOUS REHASH (Do not just restate a previous contention without having anything else to offer)

Questioning:
-Make sure you can answer efficiently, do not concede to the question -Answers must target the actual question (FOCUS), make sure that your response makes sense -Asking good questions throughout the debate is something I will look for...

Speeches: -Sponsorships/authorships must address what the bill is doing, and stay focused on the main impacts of the legislation. -Midround speeches should present new argumentation to advance the debate (NO REHASH). Refutation is also important. -Late round/Crystal speeches should summarize the debate, have a lot of refutation, and stay focused on the main topics of the debate. -Give trigger warnings if necessary before the speech.

(I value good refutation) AGD: Humor is always acceptable (make sure that the bill is suitable for it), otherwise a more serious introduction is also acceptable. Evidence: Include source and date... should analyze the evidence and use it for the debate properly. (More evidence to support your points is always good) Rhetoric and Warranting: Make sure that it effectively explains your argumentation. -Make sure your voice can be heard and make sure your speech has good fluency.

Presiding Officer: -Make sure that debate is run fast, fair, and efficiently.... -Avoid mistakes with recency and precedence. -Everything else is self-explanatory.

PFD:

I am newer to this format, have moderate experience.

As a judge here are things I will look for:

Lay appeal, equal/effective questioning, logical argumentation

Good humor is always appreciated (p.s. can possibly boost your speaks)

Discourage running theory (If you do, make sure that everyone can understand what you are saying)

Weighing is one of the most important things I look out for (PERSUADE ME!)

I lean to favor a more traditional PF debate

If you plan to run a progressive debate (please run trad) , share me a doc, and do not use too much "PF jargon" :)

Make sure that you speak at a pace that is understandable, if you are going to speak fast, SHARE A DOC!!!

Utilize your evidence effectively to refute, Cross EX IS IMPORTANT, value the minutes given.

Good luck!

Hey y'all! I'm a junior at and captain at Hagerty High school, this is my 2nd year competing in congressional debate. Finaled Emory, senate and ncfl.

If you don't wanna read all this: have fun or look like you're having fun, fulfill your role in the round, I don't care when you speak give me good warranting, get creative any style can get my one. This is a game of persuasion persuade me you're right that's all you have to do.

If you're still here I'm a d1 yapper so get ready.

Congress

Congress is unique because its a fusion of both speech and debate. At the end of the day, all you have to do is persuade me that you understand the round and that your arguments make sense. There's a lot of different ways to do that so I don't believe in one specific argument structure or style of debate so long as you can do that.

Delivery

Be persuasive is the bottom line. How you do that is up to you but let your personality shine through. If you're a funny person irl translate that into round. I will reward funny or creative intros. I'm younger as well so if you make a funny joke, even its a little out there I'll probably laugh. Creative rhetoric/framework will be rewarded. I also need to see the energy level in your speech change so vocal/tonal variation is important to me.

Authenticity

If I've heard the intro before you're losing points. Similarly, if you didn't write the speech or I can tell who coaches you based on the speech you're diffidently getting dropped be authentic.

Round Strategy

To get my one you not only need to show you're a great speaker but that you fulfill your role in the round.

Sponsors/first neg

I'll always reward a solid first cycle speech as long as you do two things.

1. set up adequate ground for your side to build off of with arguments that are well warranted yet simple to understand.

2. defend your stance in cross throughout the round, since you speak early I expect strategic cross ex blocks that poke holes in the other side's arguments

Constructive/Mid Round

Two things I need to see here

1. Even though you're not first cycle, I want to see something new. A new point, new analysis or impact extension is necessary to be ranked regardless of where you speak.

2. You provide adequate refutation for the biggest arguments so far. I can always tell the difference between a speech decorated with last names and one that refutes the heart of the argument. Therefore, attack WARRANTS and/or outweigh.

Late Round Speakers

Congress has adapted where a traditional "crystal" is no longer strategic. You can't just review the round and weigh crystals need some constructive element. This is by far the hardest type of speech to pull off well, if you can do it you prove yourself important to the round and will rank high. Late round speakers have 3 things I need to see.

1. Overview of round- this needs to hit the main arguments of the round, it doesn't need to take long. Keep in mind I flow heavily during rounds, so I'll expect you to hit the major arguments as a late speaker.

2. Simple framework-we have a tendency in this event to overcomplicate things, a late round speech needs to be organized. What does that look like? Group multiple speakers' arguments and attack them wholistically. I want clear taglines and organization, personally I think excessive name dropping looks messy. Hit everybody's name, state the arg, ref.

Flipping

I will reward speakers who flip. I've been in this situation many times and I know its stressful so if you can still give a good speech I've got your back. In the same way, don't fake flip a speech. If you claimed to be on the negation then make a big show of flipping to a sponsor, then get up there with a typed speech........ yeah no. If you have the speech, give it, trust me its not strategic to fake flip and delay debate for antics.

Presiding Officer- I understand how important this role is and how difficult it can be to get right. That said very rarely is a PO in my top three. In a room full of gifted speakers, you would have to be an exceptional PO to get my one. Keep clean and organized, be funny if you can and you'll rank highly. Even though PO's often win rounds I personally find very few instances in which I believe the PO was the best in the room. That said if you want the one, you need to go above and beyond as a leader in the chamber.

Framework

Framework is so simple yet I often see it get lost. Tell me what you’re proving, tell me who you’re refuting, unstructured args aren’t getting you anywhere. Analysis is the most important thing on my ballot, use your delivery to heighten that analysis and you've got the one. Overall, no matter where you speak, a clear framework will take you a long way, but a mistake people make is sticking to one structure and over complicating things. Simple, well-organized arguments win rounds, yapping doesn’t. Also watch the congresssy vocab, I Don't want to hear “principally”, “Highest ground” or “layers of analysis five times in a speech. I want to hear something that WINS the debate and be able to follow it easily, play with structure, get creative and have fun!!

Analysis

Should be thorough, well warranted. My biggest thing is making sure you don't overgeneralize. For example, impacting out the "marginalized groups" that's over half of America get specific. Another example with foreign policy specifically, don't generalize an entire continent/large group of countries (like Latin America or sub-saharan africa) as "corrupt" or impact out to a wholistic reduction poverty by x%. Is it realistic we reduce poverty by over half across an entire continent with a few billion dollars..,.probably not.

Decorum-

I'm paying attention to everything. If someone is notably left out of caucusing, bring them in. Similarly, I don't appreciate people who push a clearly pre-set docket on members of the room who would clearly support something else. It's a debate event for a reason, allowing everyone to express their opinions, not only on legislation but with dockets as well. Be respectful in round with both how you address your competitors in speeches and questions. In speeches there's a difference between explaining a net harm and saying the speakers on the other side want that to happen. Any phrasing where you make the opposite side sound like they're supporting whatever net harm you present isn't gonna fly. In questions I understand you can cut people off and please do, questioning can become unproductive without it. However, if you're not letting someone speak at all or being disrespectful to your competitors you will be dropped.

Final note- in congress you are always performing, from the speeches you give to the questions you ask keep the energy up and play the role. Be confident, confidence in yourself will take you a long way.

If you have questions on ballots or anything else, please please feel free to e-mail at gracejax437@gmail.com.

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!