You can't escape the nitty gritty details of humanity in forensics. From the personal aspects in interp and oratory to the political impacts in extemp and debate, the core of our conversations boils down to understanding the human condition. True, it is messy and complicated, but that is also what makes the activity so thought provoking.

Perhaps it is the intersection of the personal and the political that makes the game, Riot, an interesting topic of discussion. A small team of game designers in Italy are working to produce a "a detailed and polished simulator based on the actions of real riots happening around the world." The simulator would allow players to choose whether to play as rioters or police. They are soliciting funds on Indiegogo with the hopes of releasing the game on iOS and Android - then eventually for PC and Mac. According to the creators:

"The main purpose of this project is to create a game that will get people to be interactive with two opposing forces during clashes between rioters and police while showing the moral aspects and viewpoints of both sides."

 The game has sparked interest amongst a handful of gaming sites such as Kotaku and IndieGames. While the Indiegogo page lists "a way to visit and observe the various riots and manifestations happening in our world today," as one of the objectives of the fundraising campaign, details about *which* protests they are targeting are sparse. 

What do you think? By stating that the purpose of the game is to show the "moral aspects and viewpoints" of rioting, do you think the game can effectively move from entertainment to education? Or is it simply a game of violence and strategy with an interesting twist? Given that the game is based on real events, what does that mean for the people and politics on which it is based? While 8-bit characters may evaporate in the game, rioting can have far greater consequences in the real world.

 Check out the official game trailer above and see it for yourself. Whether you need a conversation starter or an example for a speech, Riot is sure to draw some attention.

Customers using SpeechGeek's poetry and prose interpretation for selections in University Interscholastic League (UIL) competitions during the 2012-13 season should make a copy of our Author Verification Letter.

It's easy to get tunnel-vision in forensics. You've got a tournament on the horizon. You need to research, write, memorize, and practice. You have work sessions with your coach. You show your events to alumni who competed a year or two ago. At tournaments, your head is in the game. Outside of tournaments, you're dissecting speech and debate with the people who know it best.

It's easy to focus on the people who understand forensics the most. Your coaches, teammates, and alumni understand the minutia about the activity that may get lost on other people. Topicality? Inherency? Character pops versus character melds? It sounds like gibberish to many, but the people who speak this language help you improve. They're in the center of the activity, the center of the human pyramid. Without them, it seems, you wouldn't be able to excel in the activity.

It's easy to forget that there are a lot of people who don't necessarily "speak speech" but are crucial to its existence. They're on the outside of the pyramid, but they actively support the whole thing.

Columnist Mike Pound of Joplin, Missouri, reflected on being a parent judge at his daughter's debate tournament. Calling it a "risky venture," Pound's column offers a third party viewpoint of forensics that we aren't often provided. The article is rife with references to his own perceptions of intellectual inadequacy when judging the "smart" kids. His daughter reminds him to tell debaters that he is a parent judge so they will "dumb down" their arguments. He judges some interp events and largely enjoys the experience. There is an undercurrent of exclusivity in the article. Pound paints himself as an outsider willing to sacrifice a Saturday to help his daughter's team.

It's easy to lament lay judges - the parents, teachers, and volunteers who never competed or coached but are willing to help. We spend our weekdays working on nuanced performances and arguments that we hope experienced judges will appreciate. Then, we get disappointed or angry when they go unnoticed by volunteers. (We're just as guilty at poking fun of ballots that provide little criticism or justification for ranks.) We forget, sometimes, that the forensics community is more than just coaches, competitors, and alumni. Tournaments cannot run without judges. Teams cannot exist without administrative support. Supplies cannot get purchased without budgets. The knowledge you bring to competition is built upon the knowledge of your coach(es), but also the teachers you've had in other subjects throughout the years.

Speakers need supporters. We need volunteers who are willing to sell concessions, judge rounds, raise funds, sign forms, and organize team functions. Sometimes these supporters can't give us the critical feedback we would like on our ballots. But it is worth remembering that without their help, there may not even be a tournament to attend. 

The phrase, "Thank you for judging," shouldn't just be a formality - but a sincere expression of gratitude. Take some time this month to thank your supporters. If you haven't, maybe your team could sign thank you notes to put in the mail. 

The smallest act of appreciation can go a long way in getting other people interested in forensics. 

There's a scene in Jurassic Park when our group of unsuspecting protagonists discover that the theme park will be home to living, breathing, dinosaurs. Upon watching the cloned creatures hatch, Dr. Ian Malcom (played by actor Jeff Goldblum) confronts the wealthy park owner John Hammond about the implications of his creations. "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could," he asserts, "that they didn't stop to think if they should." In the 20 years since Jurassic Park hit theaters, we haven't come much closer to walking alongside dinosaurs, but we continue to face the dilemma of technology outpacing ethics. 

Internet piracy has proven to be both a bane and a boon depending on what side of the issue you find yourself. When you're able to gain free access to paid content - be it for entertainment or educational purposes - you find yourself in possession of something you need or want without having to spend any money. On the other hand, when you've produced and made available content that others will find valuable, it is disheartening to be denied compensation for your efforts. 

Creating justifications is fairly easy. "It's not stealing, it's copying." "I'm just sharing it with a few friends." "They [the content creators] won't miss the money." "Money is tight and I really need this. I'll buy something from them in the future." Besides, you say, technology just makes it so easy, cheap, and fast to share these files.

Again, just because you can doesn't mean you should.

So when speculations begin to rise about a large group of team copying and distributing a small handful of paid debate briefs amongst themselves, we find it necessary to address the issue. Regardless of the ease, efficiency, or competitive advantage that widespread inter-team distribution of paid debate briefs may afford individuals, it is considered piracy and it is unethical. Period. We are referring not only to debate briefs but any paid forensics materials. This includes uploading debate briefs, textbooks, extemp analysis, or interp scripts on public servers so that a simple internet search allows individuals to access and download the full text materials. When an item is purchased from our store, it is for the exclusive use of the team making the purchase. 

The individuals who publish these materials are not anonymous or wealthy. They graduated from your high schools. They are alumni who come back to help teams. They are continuing their education or working other full time job(s). They are raising families. This isn't a get-rich-quick scheme of people thinking that debate briefs, current event analysis, or interp scripts will earn them a fast fortune. The time, effort, and dedication it takes to research, write, and publish materials for forensics is dizzying. It is time that is spent in lieu of having fun or being with friends or family members. This is not a hobby - it is work. It is work that is done to benefit an activity that enriched their educational experience. Their work reduces the time teams spend looking for materials and affords coaches and competitors more daylight hours to spend strengthening skills.

This isn't about forensics companies being greedy. It's about acknowledging that the content has value and its creators are due compensation. When publishers' works are freely distributed, when the compensation doesn't justify the time and effort that goes into creation, people will stop producing the materials. We know money is tight for a lot of people right now. Forensics companies price their products to be reasonably affordable to customers while justifying the effort that goes in to creating these materials.

We are here to serve the forensics community. This activity has immeasurable value for students, coaches, teachers, parents, alumni, and administrators. Forensics has helped many to not only hone their public speaking skills, but their desire to express their creativity through writing interp scripts, their interest in analyzing current events for extempers, or their ability to uncover and organize data and research for debate briefs. 

We aren't random outsiders looking to profit from schools or students. We are alumni. We are volunteers. We are advocates. We are part of this community. And we are proud of it.

If you have any questions about materials available in the SpeechGeek Market and what consitutes authorized distribution of your purchase, please e-mail us at thegeek@speechgeek.com. We are happy to offer any clarification and be of assistance in any way possible.

From Ugly Betty to his new sitcom, Partners, it's hard to imagine actor Michael Urie having enough time to direct and film the documentary, Thank You For Judging. During the 2007-08 tournament season, the former NFL D.I. National Champion took a film crew to his alma mater - Plano Senior High School in Plano, Texas - to follow the team on their path to the state tournament. After traveling through the documentary film circuit, the film is now available to download for $4.99, with additional packages offering bonus features including supplemental videos, buttons, hoodies, and even a Skype session with co-director Michael Urie.

Of the team members featured in the film, one senior would go on that same year to become the national champion in Oratory at NFL. Hoàng Ngoc Nguyên, Jr. (You can call him Mario, though, "it's easier to pronounce.") charmed audiences with his speech, "I'm a Tom Girl," which you can purchase for download alongside the documentary. We caught up with the speaker to find out more about competing with film crews, important life lessons he learned from speech, and what life had in store for him after the cameras stopped rolling.

How did you get involved in forensics?

I technically competed in my first speech and debate tournament in the third grade. There was only one tournament a year, it had poetry, prose, and an extemp-like category, and was held by district. I was so nervous in the final round that I asked to start over, yet, (somehow) I won. I was so young I didn’t even know it was actually speech and debate I was doing. Later, I started doing theatre in the sixth grade, but was always disappointed with the roles that I was given because of my physical appearance (e.g. beggar #2, someone’s child). It was when a language arts teacher told me that I should join the speech team that I finally did. I intended on doing debate, but then I found individual events and there was no turning back.

What events did you do in high school?

In high school I did Humorous and Dramatic Interp, Original Oratory, Duo, and Impromptu. Oratory and HI were undoubtedly my favorites. I particularly loved OO because it gave me the opportunity to articulate the issues that personally affected me. And as a 17 year old, the chance to have people listen to you can really empower you to believe in yourself. For example, my OO my senior year was basically a catharsis for me finally coming to terms with my sexuality. The topic focused on the double standard in gender bending, and how women were more easily allowed to take on traditionally masculine traits than men who are given less flexibility in doing so.

How did you choose that topic?

I wasn’t a particularly masculine guy growing up, particularly because of my size (5’4”) and I had wanted to address this in my OO. My coach and I had been searching for ideas, and after tons of looking for something that personally affected me, my coach had gone home and chatted with her husband about it, and the beginnings of this idea started. Over a series of meetings following we developed it until it became what it became.

What do you remember about performing in finals of Oratory at the 2008 NFL National Tournament?

For the national performance, I was devastatingly sick. I had caught a desert cold (Las Vegas) and would have been unable to perform the day before, which is when finals for OO were supposed to be scheduled, but for the first time (for some strange reason) they were scheduled the following day. So when I went out on stage, I spit out my cough drop, blew my nose, and was on two different medications. But, I made sure I did the one thing my coach told me, I took it all in. Before I started I remember looking at the entire crowd, all waiting for me to speak, and I thought, “I’m just happy my message gets to reach this many people.”

What is the documentary about?

The documentary, Thank You for Judging, includes a clip of me winning nationals, but it primarily focuses on the state tournament of that year. My team, and about two or three others were followed around all year and up until that tournament, and the film basically takes you through a state tournament and everything that goes into that. I think that the experience made everyone at the state tournament feel valued, like we were getting the attention we finally deserved. And we all competed harder because of that.

It’s been a long time since the documentary was shot, and a lot has happened since then.

What have you done in the time since you graduated high school?

After high school, I went on to compete in college forensics at Western Kentucky University. There, I was really transformed into who I am today. Thanks to the university’s guidance, I am currently living in México City on a Fulbright grant and deferred to one of the top 30 law schools in the nation.

How has participating in forensics contributed to where you are now?

I honestly am very blessed and owe a huge thanks to Forensics. Forensics taught me how to articulate the pain I had felt all my life. I was a gay, first-generation American, with an undocumented immigrant mother who was divorced from my Vietnamese war refugee father, with four other siblings living below the poverty line. Yet, I didn’t know how to put all of that into words because it was just my life. Forensics showed me how to deal with all of that, use it as motivation, and to believe in myself, and people like me. Most importantly, it gave me a voice and the power to believe I was capable of enacting change -that I was worth something. And that is the very core of who I am now, and why I am where I am. My big hope is that some kid out there reads about me and realizes that they have the strength to fight whatever it is they’re going through because they can relate to me.

What is the best advice you received before going into competition?

I think the best piece of advice I received before competing was from my high school coach. I was at a tournament my senior year and terrified because I walked into a round with a judge in full military coveralls. I thought for sure I was getting a six and figured I might as well not even try. But my high school coach told me that there was nothing I could do to control that, all I could do was deliver my message because I had no idea who needed to hear it. And that’s something I try to do in my everyday life. It just so happened I ended up getting a one in that round, and the judge wrote some amazing comments about my speech. And it’s that lesson that’s my advice to anyone struggling in Forensics, or in struggling to decide what to do after you graduate, or anything in life. Even if the odds are against you, commit and own who you are. Don’t let anyone define who you are, or who you should be.

Still want more Mario? Visit his website for more information!