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

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!

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!