If you're sure I'm wrong about something, let's just agree that I probably am.
Semis Chamber A
Pretty good rounds all the way through. At this year's Harvard tournament I learned these things:
- Snappy, dramatic, and even scenery-chewing delivery is a key skill for many judges (but it's not for me). A few of the finalists would make great silent film actors.
- Very few people pay attention to my earnest pleas and dire threats about using complete sources (name, qualification of source, publication name, and date). But some do try to adjust. And there were only a few instances where I thought something sounded sketchy and no instances at all where I was completely certain I was being lied to.
- I've lost patience for half-baked legislation. The best bills closely follow existing real-world proposals. Outside of congress, I'm pro-imagination. But I'm against imaginative bill writing. Don't use your imagination! Bills are homework for everyone, and bad bills are just cruel, cruel, cruel. If you can't find at least one expert who directly says that your plan exactly will solve the problem, you need to find another topic (for everyone's sake).
- People generally are getting better at Congress, and that's causing the event to mature and become more challenging. About ten years ago, PF was immature. Around that time I judged a PF semis round at TOC where one team had only a single piece of evidence! Congress has matured from clash-free parallel oratories to an actual debate event to a sometimes rigorous debate event. I hope we can keep that up. Congress really is the best.
