Congress- For Congress, I'm mainly looking toward your presence in the round. If I see your name repeated, or you are actively engaging with the session I will rank you up. I absolutely love, rhetoric and refutation in Congress and both of those are key factors I look at when I am ranking. For middle school tournaments, I will usually be your presiding officer, and overall I wouldn't recommend Poing, because, between a good speaker and PO, I will always rank up the speaker. I prefer speaking style over content. I might or might not fact check so don't assume you can get away with fake sources, but I won't rank you last or anything if it makes sense logically without the source.

PF/LD/CX-I firmly believe that clarity within rounds is critical. There is minimal point in a debate where everyone is just spreading arguments and going for the quantity game. Furthermore, no real debate will ever involve speaking at an incomprehensible speed. Thus I heavily prefer better speakers because quite frankly if I don't understand your argument, I will not count it on the flow. I'm game for any plans, k, whatever again just argue it well and you'll do fine.

Hi everyone! I'm a current freshman at UT Austin, and I'm excited to be judging you. I mainly competed in International Extemp in high school, though I'm also familiar with US Extemp, Congress, and Worlds.

For Extemp, PLEASE answer the question, and (if needed) preface how you're going to answer the question in your intro. In general, I value analysis more than presentation, but I always like a good joke.

In Congress, I care most that the speech you give matches where you are in the round. If you're beyond the first cycle, please refute previous speakers!

Have fun! I made my best friends from debate :)

I competed in speech and debate throughout high school.

Keep in mind that your goal in a speech should be persuasiveness. An insightful and cohesive argument alongside engaging delivery is key. Speed is fine as long as I can understand you.

For Congress:

• Be aware of arguments that have already been extensively developed to avoid rehash.
• I expect to hear refutation after the first cycle.
• Don't bring up new arguments towards the end unless it is truly groundbreaking and completely shifts the direction of the debate.
• Don't be afraid to give an early constructive for fear of "losing relevance", I will remember a good speech.
• Weighing and impacting are important.
• Being able to adapt to the round is essential. I don't want to listen to a one-sided debate.

glhf