I debated policy in high school and in college in from 1988-1994. I have coached policy, LD, public forum and now Congressional debate. Because of my policy roots substantiating your argument with evidence and refutation are important to debate. I fundamentally see Congressional debate as debate not as another form of extemp.

Who am I: student at Harvard College (class of 27) and member of the college parli debate team here.

Experience: 1 year of PF (local) + 3 years of Congress (mostly national circuit) + 3 years of extemp + college parli (APDA, BP)

Overall:

Have fun and be kind.

PF:

I'm neither tech > truth or truth > tech, all arguments are introduced at some level of trueness and I'll buy them to the extent that they're warranted. Which means I can't fully blippy contentions/responses even if they're conceded.

Weigh your arguments (and I mean actual comparative weighing, not just using the word "weighing" and throwing around mechanisms)... otherwise I have to weigh them myself and that makes neither of us happy.

Signpost signpost signpost. Trust me you have enough time in your speech to do this properly.

Spreading: not a huge fan. Debate is a communication activity and if I can't understand what you're saying then you are not communicating effectively --> you are not persuading me. I can process information quickly and write quickly, and there's nothing wrong with a fast-paced speech, but I have my limits. If I couldn't get it on my flow then you never said it.

K/Theory: Everyone got the same resolution in advance and I would REALLY prefer that you debate it. There is a very low chance I will vote on Ks or theory. I am amenable to doing so if you give me legitimate reasons as to why it's relevant--it needs warranting and impacts like any other kind of argument. Try your own risk.

Framework: Give me an explicit one even if it's basic. You've taken the time to write out all your arguments, it's not much extra work to tell me what lens I should view them through. And it will make me a bigger fan of your arguments.

Off-time roadmaps: I don't mind them, but they are not a substitute for good organization within the actual speech itself, and I'd rather you just did that.

Congress:

It's called Congressional DEBATE for a reason. Beautiful speeches that don't clash or engage with arguments belong in speech tournament, not in Congress.

Please for the love of all that is good and holy:

1. Explain your links. If you do not connect the dots in your own argument I will not do it for you.
2. Explain your impacts. If you do not tell me why I should care about your argument, I just won't.
3. Weigh. You do not make your arguments in a vacuum, especially if you speak late. Please situate your argument in the context that it enters into and compare it to other arguments.

Round vision is key. If you know you know.

Authors/sponsors: PLEASE PLEASE explain both the problem in the status quo and how the legislation addresses it. That's your job.

Things I'm looking for in Congress:

Organization: Make your points clear and provide a roadmap.

Clash: Remember this is a debate. I want to see bold questioning, direct refutation, and adaptability.

Respect: Be tenacious, but check tone.  Come back to what's best for the constituents, and assume you are all working together for the betterment of society.  

Finally, have fun, and be yourself!  I appreciate creativity and personal flair in speeches.

hey guys! i'm bella, a senior at east ridge high school just about rounding out my fourth and final year of debate.

a clarification before reading: many of the things i'll list here are going to appear harsh. if you are in a novice/jv chamber, do not fear for your life/ranks. this is my ideal - not something i'm looking for from people who just started debate. that being said, what am i looking for?

i like a lot of basic judge things. talk well, signpost, cite correctly and speak how is appropriate. in addition:

• PARLIPRO. i love parliamentary procedure, if you can demonstrate an extremely knowledgeable understanding of nsda rules and can appropriately guide a chamber with them (either via presiding or points of inquiry/order) i will definitely notice AND appreciate. that said, i am not going to interfere much with "incorrect" parlipro (motions that don't exist, etc) because it's just not where i think my input is best needed.
• i tend to go logos > pathos > ethos in what i value most. do NOT misinterpret this as "i don't care if you have sources in your speech" because i absolutely do and will absolutely think less of a speech that does not accurately and correctly source arguments. what that means is i value very good weighing/impacting and logic more than i value things like source dates, because while they are extremely important, the sources available on the internet are very much out of your control as opposed to things like logos and pathos. however, exemplary sources explained well are absolutely things i look out for and rank accordingly.
• FOR PRESIDING OFFICERS:do your job, do it correctly. in terms of judge adaptation, i go accuracy > efficiency > speed. by this, i mean, get your p+r right. it's your entire job. it's a stressful job, but if you are actively volunteering for it, you better at least know how to do it right. be quick if you can, but i will always value an accurate PO over a quick one. that being said, please do not waste chamber time saying rehearsed lines. i do not care if the po highly frowns upon a one sided debate. everyone is frowning. i'm frowning. don't make me frown at you. if you can do those things with minimal mistakes, you typically have a place in my top 5. (i have more tolerance for novices just starting presiding/ people who originally didn't want to PO, but not total forgiveness)

brief list of no nos

• i really don't like broken cycles. improvisation is a huge part of congress and if you can show that you are a quick enough debater to fill in for a broken cycle, big ups from me!
• that being said, something i like even less than a broken cycle is recessing for speech time. either come prepared or be ready to speak unprepared, you get my drift?
• biased sources (cnn, heritage foundation, fox news)
• constructives after 2nd round
• suspending the rules
• invalid motions
• PO comments outside of necessary reminders
• "silly" agds on serious topics (guys we don't need a pun on a speech about a refugee crisis)
• harmful rhetoric, even unintentionally
• not being respectful of competitors (names+pronouns)
• "shouty" questioning
• wasting debate time. if a round has 30 minutes left and you recess when there's another bill people who are ready to speak on can speak on... i frown on that. people who went above and beyond (or, truly, just did the work) should be able to reap the benefits of all the time offered.

hope this helps :) again, many of you reading this are most likely novices so as long as you are still following basic respect things you are still learning so these mistakes will happen naturally. remember to have fun!!

CONGRESS

I'm recently graduated and have been doing congress for 3 years now, w/ most of my experience at local or state, and only having competed in Nats 2023. My paradigm is pretty typical but informed by some personal experience.

For POs: Know that I value you, but you're not fighting an easy battle and you don't get an automatic 1! I've been there, I know what it's like. Of course, strive to make as few mistakes as possible and if you do, as long as you rectify it immediately, it's not a problem at all. If you can do that, you'll be rewarded in the ballot. Be professional!

For speakers: Please DEBATE! This isn't a speech category despite what the PF kids may have you believe. Engage with other people's arguments in clash, and if you're utilizing previous arguments then you had better frame them in a VERY different way that makes your point valuable and unique. Whether constructive or late-round, emphasize your impact, make me care about your point. (Remember: Re-hash is not valuable debate, please do not do this. Late-round adaptation for the sake of balancing debate will be HIGHLY rewarded, because it is by far the most difficult part of congress.)

Etiquette: Don't be the guy that shouts, no one wants to hear it. I don't care how good your point is, do not be insulting while you are delivering it. Being polite while firm is absolutely achievable, I know you can do it.

This is a category that's very near and dear to me, and it is a ton of fun to compete in and watch! Enjoy it :)