General Debate Info: Students may speak as fast or slow as they would like, as long as the event's time limits are followed.

Debate is challenging, so I applaud all students who participate! Debaters must be respectful to their peers at all times, personal insults and discriminatory remarks of any kind are NOT to be tolerated; you are here to criticize their evidence and arguments, not the debaters themselves. Debaters must use a mature, eloquent, and patient tone of voice; yelling and shouting do not make you the better debater. There is a difference between arguing and debating, please perform the latter.

I hold clash and rebuttal at very high importance; debaters can be prepared with all the evidence they'd like, but they will never really know what questions/holes their competitors will bring up, and the way they respond to that truly displays the skill of a debater.

Finally, tech over truth.

Congressional (House/Senate) Info: As an event with shorter speeches compared to the others, clash holds a large part in the ranking decision. Solid evidence, quick thinking, and passion for the Aff/Neg are also big factors in the rankings. Also, I realize and sympathize with how challenging and important PO'ing can be, so I have no issue ranking the PO 1st for that round if they deserve it! Congress is about memorability, so the competitors that I remember for their skill, even after they've left the room, will be highly ranked.

Hey! I'm Isabelle Hatch (she/her), please include me in email chains if you have them: izzmck1@gmail.com

I'm currently a varsity debater, and have competed in Congress, Public Forum, Domestic and International Extemp, DI, POI, and Impromptu.

In Congress, practically anything goes! I appreciate lively cross, but I also judge on decorum. Keep it respectful, but engaging. Please don't pace back and forth, it's very distracting, and I will comment on it. Instead, look into the speaker's triangle! I will be flowing, but be sure to restate your name and code consistently.

When it comes to LD and Policy, I expect well-thought-out and developed cases, respectful but lively cross, and NO SPREADING. I can follow fast speaking, but if I can't understand your constructive, then your points don't get across. Please take that into account during the round. I appreciate signposts and off-time roadmaps before rebuttals.

In PF, no spreading. Please. I'm pretty much fine with anything, but be sure to weigh from summary onward. Anything dropped in final focus won't be evaluated. Please give signposts / an off-time roadmap before rebuttal, summary, and ff. I generally judge tech > truth, but not strictly.

I usually won't ask for cards unless it's incredibly strange, but please show the cut card and the source / article.

Good luck!

I'd like to start out by stating that I used to have a paradigm and now it appears to have fled. Please know that that paradigm was much better and more comprehensive than this paradigm, but this will have to do for now. Don't let this paradigm be a reflection on me as a person.

PF

Rate- As long as you enunciate and I can understand you, have at it.

Content- Some philosophy and broad application is fine, but your arguments should be grounded in real life context and specifics.

I'm a teacher-coach, in that order. Your content and the flow matters but so does your clarity, organization, tone, and decorum. If both teams have sensational arguments and it's close I have no problem giving the win to who I think are the better speakers.

Consider myself a flay judge. The RFD is going to read more like a narrative and less like you won at argument Tetris.

Please have fun. I promise I will or, at the very least, if it's late and we're worn out, I'm still going to look like I'm having fun, and I'm going to do the best I can to give you something to work with and a clear reason for my decision.

hi hi! i'm Cevan! (sa-vahn) (she/her/hers) - cevanlouie7@gmail.com

everyone: I find paradigms so funny honestly just compete in whatever way YOU feel most authentic to you! Don't conform to me, judges are here to listen to YOU. You can be incredible at speech and debate and also kind. Speech and debate is welcoming and inclusive, i will easily drop speaker scores/my ballot if you are blatantly rude ;D

interp/platform: Your story is unique! Show me how you connect with your piece, how it connects to the world, and why it matters. Authentic advocacy/intros >> I look at all the standard blocking, facials, character differentiation etc but advocacy is why you have a platform I pref that.

debate: Pretty flay to be transparent but please debate in whatever form makes YOU comfortable, whether that be prog or trad or spreading or whatever. I am willing to listen to everything.

• tech > truth... if you don't weigh it'll default to mine
• speed is fine just look up at me for confirmation i am with you -> speech docs
• SIGNPOST, KEY VOTERS, and COLLAPSE COLLAPSE PLEASE
• pet peeves: long evidence exchanges, new ev in summary, definitional debates, tossing ev w/o a warrant
• speaks: STRAT, uniqueness, humor, analogies (very interp of me lmao)

learn something new, enjoy being apart of this activity, and best of luck!

Hey!

I did Congress for 4 years and Speech and Debate for 6 on the National circuit as well as local.

I value and look for...

• Evidence and logical reasoning. Evidence is very important for making an argument legitimate. Clear warrants and links for evidence are crucial.
• Rebuttal and round awareness. After the first 2 cycles of each speech, I want to see the incorporation of refutation in your speech. I especially value refutation that is backed up with evidence. Minimize rehash as best as you can.
• Questioning should be utilized to poke holes in an argument. Avoid using it for questions on sources and clarification.
• Unique and clear impacts. Your impact is one of the most important parts of your speech make sure you are discussing how this will affect the people you serve as a lawmaker. I'm a big fan of impact weighing as well make sure to tell me why your impact is the most valuable in the round.

Speaking clearly and emulating a lawmaker is very important to me. Passion and rhetoric should be present throughout your speech. If you want to be silly or serious, your prerogative, I have no preference just remember to stay professional and polite in the round.

Overall have fun, Congress is a fun and creative event!

LD/PF Overview:

I am a debate coach and therefore comfortable with both progressive and traditional styles of debate. However, if you decide to go progressive, you must still clearly be topical and clearly have traditional elements like a value and a criterion in LD. In addition, you must still argue your opponents traditional case in a traditional way when you rebuttal.

I like to list things I do not like, so that you can avoid them:

· Telling a judge they can “drop the debate” or that “you can’t allow that argument.” I’ll be the judge, thank you. Please, do not ever tell a judge what to do or don’t do. You should explain your argument in such a way that I feel compelled to do so on my own volition.

· Language that is too aggressive, because assertion is okay but aggression is demeaning and degrades the integrity of debate. For example using phrases such as “are you aware that” for the beginning of a question suggests you think you research more than your opponent. In addition, when debaters say, “my opponent never did…” and then list something their opponent did do, it’s a loss of points for the speaker because I mark that as not paying attention to your opponent. Other phrases that suggest their arguments are “oblivious” or “asinine” or “ignorant” –Don’t suggest your opponent is lacking in any form.

· I dislike when the rebuttals are purely pre-loaded (some blocking is fine) but when your rebuttal is not specific to your opponent’s case and only defends yours against a general argument, I will not count that as a case defense.

· Battles over evidence are borderline pointless. Definitely point out evidence that is misrepresented, outdated, or otherwise taken out of context. Please do not make one piece of evidence last the entire debate. Mention it once, state you’d like to contest it, and let the judge (me) read the evidence at the end of the round. Most of the time it is not evidence that wins my vote, but the explanation and impact. To me, impact is most valuable. Do you know why any of this matters to anyone? Can you explain this in an attainable way for anyone, not just a debate judge? That’s how you prove to me that your argument is holistic and true.

LD/PF Paradigm:
I expect you to time one another, verbally so that I can note when we are over or under.
If you are failing to provide evidence that should be easily available, I will consider this in my vote. Evidence should be organized and known well-enough to reference quickly.
If you fail to engage with your opponent as an intellectual equal worthy of competing against you in the round, I will take this out in speaker points. I may also let it sway my vote, because ad hominem is a fallacy, and I like my debates to remain logical.