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 earn 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 earn you a drop/loss and 0 speaker points.
• Debates should typically be topical. If your speech is 3 contextless minutes of Dhar Mann videos, you should reprep your speech.

"Good luck. Don't suck." - Mr. Cosio

Congressional

Argumentation

• A concise thesis statement outlining your argumentation is nice.
• Warrant your claims. Tell me why your claims hold true.
• "An assumption is an assumption because the assumption doesn't have evidence. That's why it's an assumption!" - Tommy Nichol
• 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 speechpad, practically or literally, for your entire speech.
• Deliver AGDs relatable to the topic.
• 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 2 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 cannot vote for argumentation I do not understand.
• I am a flay judge.
• Please disclose.
• I usually have enough topic knowledge, but please do not assume I know everything.
• Speed is acceptable, but do not spread. I will let you know if you are speaking too rapidly.
• 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

I rank on a mix of who added the most to the round and who was the best explaining their point and convincing me that it was the most important in the round. Clarity and argumentation go a long way. If you do something special, tell me what it is and why its so important.

For Presentation:

• Be Confident when speaking + questioning (projection helps). Be careful of screaming into your microphone if online, adapt to the size of the room if in person.

• Try not to read off of your legal pad, especially in your intro and in any other important piece of rhetoric or impact. Eye contact goes a long way. This is still true online. If you do not have your speech printed out, I would recommend timing yourself and maintaining eye contact with the camera as if it were the judges while you have your speech opened.

• Use creative gestures. Even if you're online, keep your hands (and face) in view.

Argumentation:

• Do not repeat others' arguments unless you meaningfully extend on or refute them. Show how YOU add to the debate. Everyone past the sponsor should try to refute. If someone refutes your point, I expect you to try to question them.

• If you attempt to crystal, name the question of the debate and answer it for your side.

• NO SAME SIDE QUESTIONS

Reach out to me for more Feedback @matthewcollinscongress on discord @matthewdouglascollins on Instagram. I love this event so I'd be happy to help in detail.

Howdy! This is Representative Hain, spelled H-A-I-N, just like "blame the Maine on Hain" for all my history nerds out there. Tongue-and-cheek intro aside, I've been doing Congress for a hot minute now, and have accrued some opinions and all that. Here's some crucial characterizations of my round evaluation:

•I've always spat in the face of conventional wisdom, and will always wholeheartedly endorse a performance that's innovative and new; with that being said, if you innovate just to innovate, it's kinda obvious :(

•I transcribe a relatively detailed flow - well, detailed for a Congress round - but will almost always prioritize lay appeal. You're being judged by a d3 padless speaker here :)

•on that note, if you're speaking padless, you're not special, homie. most people don't understand how to integrate extended ref and rhetorical clash in no pad speeches, and the consequent speech is diluted, jumbled, and unpreferable to a speech given with sticky notes or a notecard. 99% of the time, you should just pick up the pad, cause if you don't and give me a three minute constructive, i will not be happy. (with all of that being said, if you want pointers on pad dependency, I'm your guy!)

•good news for my circuit po's is that you'll need to have some draconian mistake to get bumped out of my t6; bad news is that you'll have to either buy me dinner or be sam berlin to get anything over a 3.

•bonus points if you get the blame the maine on hain reference, not even the most fanatical US history nerds have understood the allusion

Truth is, though, that Congress isn't so deep as to necessitate that you adapt to an arbitrary paradigm; at the time of writing this, I haven't checked a judge's paradigm before round since September, and that's a conscious decision. What I really want from you is what everyone else does: a unique fulfilling of your own potential and your own style, and it doesn't matter if that manifests on flow or lay or whatever. Just show up and give it your all...preferably with a pad.

If you want any specific feedback about my thoughts on a round or any specific tips, hit me up at davidhain08@gmail.com. I'm always happy to help!

I did Speech and Debate for six years in almost every event under the sun. I coached congress for 3+ years, was one of the only people to win the California State Championship in two events (Congressional Debate in 2022 and PO in 2024), placed Top 10 twice at NSDA Nationals. Needless to say, I love this event.

Congress

Speech and Debate? Yes, I am a firm believer that congress is a mix of Speech and Debate. That means I value eloquence, presentation, and stage presence just as much as I value evidence, refutation, and well-structured arguments. It is difficult to win a congress round without a grasp of both sets of skills.

Clash: it's congressional debate. Refutation shows me you're actively engaging with the arguments on the other side. I really value weighing in congress, show me why the arguments and values of your side matter. A good crystallization speech towards the end of the round will always have a soft spot in my heart.

Rhetoric: I'm a sucker for well-delivered, well-written rhetoric. It's important to me that you humanize your impacts and take them to the point where it would matter to an average person like myself (though I'd like to think I'm slightly above average).

Flipping: Being able to flip sides in round is the mark a good debater. It shows me that you did your research ahead of time and your speaking skills are refined enough to where you can speak extemporaneously.

POs: As someone who has POed at state and national level tournaments, I think POs are consistently under appreciated. I value a confident, knowledgeable PO who commands respect of the room. Don't try to be overly theatrical, run the round quickly and fairly.

Another note: I have no tolerance for sexism, racism, homophobia, etc. in debate rounds. If you're unsure about whether a joke or argument could rub someone the wrong way, you probably shouldn't be running it.

This event thrives because of its community so I am always available to share more insight on my ballots, experiences (both as a competitor and coach), or judging philosophy!

Debate

Treat me like a lay judge as I don't have too much experience judging debate events. My one ask is that you don't spread, even if you're in higher level rounds. It's hard to have effective debate if no one can understand what you're saying.

Hey! Im Audrey, a sophomore at Pine View School in FL. I've competed in speech and debate for a little over a year now, trying PF and Policy, but sticking with Congress as my main event.

GENERAL:

Applies to all events: If I hear you being racist, derogatory, or discriminatory in any way shape or form, you will be dropped. Speech and debate is a community for everyone and as a participant in the event, it's your job to uphold that. Inappropriate action is never excusable.

CONGRESS:

I think that congress isn't a speech or a debate event, it's both. Presentation matters just as much as argumentation.

The way to get on my ballot is pretty simple, show me why your argument is the strongest in the round.

Any speech after the first cycle should have refutation. Clash is the only way you can prove to me why you are the strongest speaker in the round.

Have structure! If you're all over the place, it's hard to follow with your line of reasoning.

I need a strong warrant. Even if it's clearly logical, you need to prove the link to me and actually explain why your argument is relevant and occurs.

I really enjoy a strong, heartfelt impact, but don't just use the same old rhetoric. Make me actually care about what you're saying. Claims and warrants are equally as important, but the way you make it matter to the audience is through strong impacts.

In questioning, please be respectful. If you're getting questioned, let them finish their questions and actually answer rather than spewing about something else. If you're questioning, let them answer you question. Constantly speaking over others isn't going to reflect well on your ballot (unless they're genuinely not answering your question)

PO:

I don't think it's fair to rank a person timing and tapping a gavel against a person who's worked hard on a speech and participated throughout the round. A perfect PO will place somewhere near the 5 on my ballot. If you make a mistake, move on. It's not that deep.

A good PO is someone who doesn't take up time in the round and is actually efficient.You're not a speaker in the round, take up the least amount of time as you can, that's what a good PO does.

Extra:

Flipping is greatly appreciated. I know it's tedious and you probably want to give the speech you came in with, but it's really boring to sit through a round with five aff speeches in a row. It probably won't be your best work, but flipping for the sake of your chamber will reflect well on your ballot.

Humor, if done correctly is great but not necessary

Be respectful and have fun :)

DEBATE:

Please treat me like a lay judge.

tech>truth

If you're not going to send me your speech doc, DO NOT SPREAD. If I can't understand you, there's no way I'm gonna value anything you're saying. If you are going to send your doc, my email is audreyshwang@gmail.com (I personally think that spreading is really stupid. Like if you're confident in your arguments, you shouldn't have to dump 10 contentions on your opponents and say you win off the fact that they didn't respond to one)

If you explain any kritiks/theories/tricks clearly, I can follow along, but I'm not that experienced with them.

I've heard some really stupid theories run, like clash of clans theory... come on.

If you ask me to disclose after round, I will

SPEECH:

I haven't competed in a speech event, but I have coached some oratory kids on speaking and have listened to far too many extemp/impromptu/oo speeches that I know a bit on what to look for.

Your speech should always be keeping me engaged, whether its through your topic, motions, tone or whatever. I shouldn't be getting bored or tired of your speech. Especially in OO/Info/HI/DI, the whole point is to be talking about a problem your average person should care about. If your speech is good, I won't be getting bored.

Key take away, if you end your speech with me feeling moved or learning something new, you'll probably place highly on my ballot.

____________________________________________

Im always looking for ways to be a better judge, so I you have any questions about your ballot or my paradigm, feel free to shoot me an email :)

audreyshwang@gmail.com

Tell me if you want a flow round or a lay round, need both teams to agree if yall wanna go fast

Flow judge-will yell clear if needed

How I layer the win
Theory

K

case/Da/CP

Dont run phil, everything else is calm tho

IMPLICATE

Tech>Truth

Tricks are fun, run if you can

add me to chain nachiketmittal26@mittymonarch.com

Lay:

Do wtv lowk, j have fun the other stuff is j stuff that I enjoy but like j do you dawg

NBA References will give you max or near max speaks, especially analogies

I love jokes the funnier the speech the higher the speaks.

I love some good rhetoric

Dont get super bogged down on the flow, find big args and explain why u are winning.

Hey everyone!

I’m Jack, my pronouns are he/him/his and you’re reading this 5 minutes before your round, or paradigm stalking in advance…Hopefully it’s the latter! I have experience in every event from Congress to Extemp, to Worlds, and even to Duo!

I’ve qualified to TOC, TFA, and NIETOC multiple times each, qualified to nationals in extemp and congress, and made finals at tournaments like UT Austin, UC Berkeley, UIL 6A where I placed in the top half for congress, and got 4th place at TFA state in congress too.

GENERAL

Let’s play my favorite game! How to get downed with me as your judge! I’m your host:

• Homophobia (horrible idea to disrespect your judge bro)
• Racism
• Sexism
• Ableism
• Hatred or Disrespect to anyone in your round, especially bullying novice competitors

-“Be humble.” -Kendrick (i hate cocky debaters and will happily down you for having an elitist mindset)

-This activity is supposed to be fun, I’m looking for people having fun and who are passionate about what they’re presenting to me. I don’t want to give a grumpy highschooler a good score at 8 a.m. or 10 p.m.

-Any safety concerns or questions you have are things I would love to help with, please don’t hesitate! I promise everyone needs help sometimes.

Here are specific things on how I judge each event

CONGRESS

• I think the best part of this event is that, if treated properly, it can help a speaker create a style of argument and speaking unique to them. I really encourage you to try and find yours with me as your judge. I’ve watched the same National Final Rounds and will be able to tell if you’re copy and pasting rhetoric or arguments. Please keep this event fresh! I’m likely to reward a unique debater as opposed to one who plays it safe in their chamber.

• Anyone in a given round can get my one. Giving a combination of early round constructive speeches and later round rebuttals and summaries are a sign of a very good debater and I’m likely to recognize that and reward it. Flexibility is pretty important in this event and I think for productivity of a chamber, I would only plan out the 1A, 1N, and general splits. Deciding a speaker order for like 5 cycles is kinda crazy work and, in my opinion, ruins the uniqueness of congress.

• I keep a scale in my head of which side I believe is winning the debate. At the end of the debate, I will rank the debaters by how much I believe they changed my scale of who is winning.

• I am not a fan of arguments that utilize constitutionality, “Trump will veto,” or “we don’t have the power to implement this legislation” as your sole offense. I find these do little to engage in the debate, and honestly I just don’t like them. I think if they’re used as a rebuttals to an argument in ADDITION to another sound rebuttal it can work.

• Negative speakers need to provide a harm to passing. Period point blank.

• In a world where people fake evidence, the logic and warranting that explains your evidence matters more than the evidence. Good statistics can largely enhance a speech but not make it. I can tell if you give weird evidence. If you say something crazy, I will look it up.

• Rhetoric is important: good funny rhetoric > good serious rhetoric > bad serious rhetoric > no rhetoric > bad funny rhetoric

PO RANKS

Listen, I get it a presiding officer is imperative to a round and congress fundamentally would not be able to happen without one. However, reading patterns and time keeping is just never going to be something I’m able to place over a great or even simply solid debater. In prelims of any tournament, if you’ve done a flawless or close to flawless job you will advance out of that round. I will be asking tabroom or looking through an email archive to see what amount of speakers advance and I will make sure you do. (Assuming other ranks are in agreement with mine) Past the first round of debate, nothing is guaranteed. If you’ve done a great job in your semi round I will do my best to give you an advancing rank, but at a good tournament I refuse to ensure you will beat out speakers. A good rule of thumb is that I will give a PO a 3-5 but this is subject to change and flexibility based on the round. In a final round, if you’ve made no mistakes the best rank you’ll receive is a 3 (This is pretty rare; I find myself ranking the PO 6th in final rounds I’ve participated in)

EXTEMP

• I find it rare that there's ever a point where a structure other than three points is necessary or better. That being said, if you execute a non conventional speech well, there’s no reason to rank you down. It’s also not a reason to rank you up.

• Content 65%/Speaking 35%

• Huge on top enthusiast -> On tops related to you agd> On tops unique to your point and independent by themselves > No on tops > Bad on tops

• Realistically unless I’ve been asked or its very competitive tournament specific to extemp I will trust you’re using good ethics and not deliberately source checking. If I feel like I need to I absolutely will and will be happy to down you for faking evidence. I think fake evidence can only get you so far and realistically an extemper who uses real sources and prioritizes being honest will always naturally win