I am a cardiologist in the Washington, DC area and I have no background in debate. I have been a parent judge for 6 years, so I do know some of the basic rules.

Please speak clearly and be respectful with asking and answering questions.

Keep your arguments generally socially acceptable.

I prefer probable arguments as opposed to farfetched arguments.I want to hear a good debate. Avoid repeating what others have said. Make sure you address previous speakers and expound on arguments.

Please do not bring up your computer or tablet when giving speeches.

At the end of the session, I have to rank you and that is difficult, so please talk to me when I am finished if possible.

Email Chain: megan.butt@charlottelatin.org

Charlotte Latin School (2022-), formerly at Providence (2014-22).

Trad debate coach -- I flow, but people read that sometimes and think they don't need to read actual warrants? And can just stand up and scream jargon like "they concede our delink on the innovation turn so vote for us" instead of actually explaining how the arguments interact? I can't do all that work for you.

GENERAL:

COMPARATIVELY weigh ("prefer our interp/evidence because...") and IMPLICATE your arguments ("this is important because...") so that I don't have to intervene and do it for you. Clear round narrative is key!

If you present a framework/ROB, I'll look for you to warrant your arguments to it. Convince me that the arguments you're winning are most important, not just that you're winning the "most" arguments.

Please be clean: signpost, extend the warrant (not just the card).

I vote off the flow, so cross is binding, but needs clean extension in a speech.

I do see debate as a "game," but a game is only fun if we all understand and play by the same rules. We have to acknowledge that this has tangible impacts for those of us in the debate space -- especially when the game harms competitors with fewer resources. You can win my ballot just as easily without having to talk down to a debater with less experience, run six off-case arguments against a trad debater, or spread on a novice debater who clearly isn't able to spread. The best (and most educational) rounds are inclusive and respectful. Adapt.

Not a fan of tricks.

LD:

Run what you want and I'll be open to it. I tend to be more traditional, but can judge "prog lite" LD -- willing to entertain theory, non-topical K's, phil, LARP, etc. Explanation/narrative/context is still key, since these are not regularly run in my regional circuit and I am for sure not as well-read as you. Please make extra clear what the role of the ballot is, and give me clear judge instruction in the round (the trad rounds I judge have much fewer win conditions, so explain to me why your arguments should trigger my ballot. If I can't understand what exactly your advocacy is, I can't vote on it.)

PF:

Please collapse the round!

I will consider theory, but it's risky to make it your all-in strategy -- I have a really high threshold in PF, and because of the time skew, it's pretty easy to get me to vote for an RVI. It's annoying when poorly constructed shells get used as a "cheat code" to avoid actually debating substance.

CONGRESS:

Argument quality and evidence are more important to me than pure speaking skills & polish.

Show me that you're multifaceted -- quality over quantity. I'll always rank someone who can pull off an early speech and mid-cycle ref or late-cycle crystal over someone who gives three first negations in a row.

I reward flexibility/leadership in chamber: be willing to preside, switch sides on an uneven bill, etc.

WORLDS:

Generally looking for you to follow the norms of the event: prop sets the framework for the round (unless abusive), clear intros in every speech, take 1-2 points each, keep content and rhetoric balanced.

House prop should be attentive to motion types -- offer clear framing on value/fact motions, and a clear model on policy motions.

On argument strategy: I'm looking for the classic principled & practical layers of analysis. I place more value on global evidence & examples.

Hi hi! A bit about me, I was congress captain for Bronx Science senior year and I'm currently a freshman at Yale on the Yale debate association and I'm coaching for Bronx still. I know quite a bit about debate and about the bills y'all are debating.

Speech Structure:

• Your speeches must be coherent and have easy to follow arguments. Your warrants have to be concise for me to follow or else I will give you a nine. After every speech, one message should resonate with me. Every speech should convey a story, don't focus on ranks! Instead focus on how effective that message is being delivered to me.

• Terminalize your impacts for having an effective persuasion strategy.

Rhetoric:

• I love fun intros, don't be boring! Make sure your bars make sense or else I will cringe.

• Make sure your conclusions connect back to your intros so the speech is full circle. Again, stories are important. Of course sprinkling in rhetoric throughout your speech is always appreciated.

Round Interactions:

• Every speech after the sponsor should have some level of refutation and/or weighing.

• If you don't do any of these you will be dropped! So beware. Impact and link turns <3these make for a really interesting round. No rehash! I will zone out after I hear the same claim/warrant. Extend your impacts for new substance for the round to debate with.

• I personally love crystals and if well executed, will be ranked very high.

PO:

• A good P.O is a silent P.O unless needed in the round. In order to run a round effectively, the fewer words that come out of your mouth the better. I will rank you in the T4 or above if you follow these rules.

Evidence:

• Evidence must be from a reputable source.

All in all, make sense, weight and ref, tell a story, and be kind to your fellow competitors. Have fun!!

Hi! I'm Sasha DiMare, a recent alum of the national circuit. I competed in Congress for 6 years and Informative Speaking for my last year. I'm currently a student at Georgetown University, studying International Political Economy and Management at the McDonough School of Business, and I am a part-time coach for Congressional Debate. I write very thorough notes on both your performance and the debate, so make sure to check your ballots!

CONGRESS

DO:

• have a strong and brief walkup (name, quick spelling (if at all), side of debate)
• annunciation and projection is HUGE for me. have the confidence to be firm in your voice. I want to be able to discern every word
• have an intro that sticks (and it less than 30 seconds). I love humor in speeches, but it has to be done elegantly and tactfully.
• make your claims and warrants very clear. Many debaters write claims that are actually warrants, or have non-unique warrants that fall flat in the round. your warrant is one of the most important parts of your speech
• have quantifiable data. not claims from people who cannot put numbers to names.
• make your impact HIT the chamber. your impact should tell me why I, the average American should care.
• weigh both sides of the debate
• have substantive refutation, not just name dropping other senators
• be professional!!
• keep your questions and answers in questioning brief

DON'T:

• interrupt questioners/ speakers during questioning
• stand before the PO calls for questioners
• scream. seriously.
• pull cards/data from illegitimate sources OR AI. If something sounds far fetched, I may do a brief search to see if your source/data exists.
• rehash points without providing depth
• be inactive during questioning
• be on your phone during round
• talk about other competitors after round
• use dehumanizing language towards certain regions, ethnicities, communities, or groups (e.x. "illegal")--> please use the politically correct term (e.x. "undocumented")

I have over twenty years experience working for the NC Department of Public Safety. I teach a Law and Justice elective at Cuthbertson HS. I enjoyed working in the criminal court system and appreciate those of you that have the skills to make good oral arguments. I place a value on respecting other opinions and proper decorum. It is much harder to make a good point about an unpopular opinion, therefore I take notice the level of difficulty. Lastly, I feel it is very important to be able to adapt to the current debate.

Here is what I value

1. Clarity and Structure - Make your points easy to follow
2. Evidence and Reasoning - Having strong and well-explained support is key
3. Engagement - Thoughtful rebuttals and responses show critical thinking
4. Professionalism - Being respectful and confident in your delivery goes a long way

This is my third year as a parent judge. A few things about my judging preferences:

- I value a clear logic flow and argument

- It’s important during a debate to allow the listeners to understand your argument and points, so it’s better to speak slowly and to be heard, rather than quickly (clarity over speed)

• I love a good clash. You’ll get credit for a clear, logical argument, and dynamic arguments are very effective.
• Be civil in your crossfire. You will lose speaker points with me for badgering your opponent.

For Congressional Debate: I value the quality of your argument, the delivery of the speech, the depth of your questions, and your leadership/interactions in the chamber. In-round awareness shows you are engaged. You can still present unique info when you have lower recency. Be civil…lack of decorum shows lack of leadership ability.

Most important: have fun. The ability to debate is a crucial life skill!

Mostly a flow judge who appreciates, in cross, civility, clear questions, and direct answers to said questions—experienced in Worlds, PF, LD and Congress. Speak clearly; don't play stupid evidence games. I'm not into K's or attempting to win a round on things not topical to the round. Sometimes in PF I won't flow all the way through focusing more on who wins the offense of the round.=

Congress specific: Advance arguments, challenge one another and know procedure. I will vote up great POs, great congressional-style speakers, and those who are functioning in debate mode (not just speech mode).

I enter the chamber already impressed with everyone there.

I understand that the docket is finalized just a few days before you are expected to present, with reason, passion, and (where appropriate) humor, a finished product, with a beginning, middle, and end. All the while listening carefully to your colleagues and weaving in their points and even changing your own where needed. If you dare to extemp or to flip sides to balance the chamber, I’m definitely impressed!

Clarity is paramount - don’t put all of your points in there, just the crucial ones. Leave the rest to come out in Q&A. Help create a 'living' chamber that ebbs and flows with the arguments. The goal is to advance the bill. A series of disconnected speeches does not do this.

I value listening skills, empathy, and flexibility, but firmness and reasoned push-back when needed. I look for helpful questions and motions that move the legislation forward, for collegiality between a mostly random collection of people who are expected to work together as a body, for being 100% present even after your own presentation is over and showing that you care. Ultimately, you are there to help the people. This is your chance to model for the real US Congress how a legislative body should work.

Finally, I recognize that the P.O. is key to pulling together a successful legislative debate - it's hard to do well and a real skill. Clear and simple instructions, quick enforcement, fairness, flexibility when the situation demands it, and a careful steering of the chamber in the service of good legislation are required. The P.O. needs to be on her/his toes. A job well done will be rewarded accordingly.