Haselow,+Noah

__**Background**__ I debated LD for 4 years at Brookfield East HS (WI) and dabbled in Nat Circuit PF my senior year – speed kept me out of VLD.

You can read your performance aff, just do it slowly. Please read the //Speed// section.
 * __TL;DR__**

__** Speed **__ I guess we'll start here since it's probably the most important. I have a hard time with speed because I never really experienced it in HS. If you're reading this for a WI LD/PF tournament, then you'll be fine; if you're Nats LD or Policy, then you'll need to slow down or strike me. If you need more clarification, the neg in this debate is like a 9/10 on my scale when she starts the disad (13:00), so consider it an upper-threshold: [] Don't go much faster <3. Anything higher than a 10/10 (my scale) and you're risking me not catching arguments. I will say “slow”, “clear”, etc, when needed -- probably not more than twice though.


 * If you cannot understand speed**, please let your opponent know //before the round//, //in front of me//, and we -- all 3 or 5 of us -- will have a discussion about what a reasonable speed is. I will hold __both of you__ to this speed. If you believe that they have exceeded it, feel free to run speed theory/K. I will not drop either of you without an argument //in round// about (1) how y'all violated our agreement and (2) why violating it is bad.

I personally believe that spreading is beneficial to the debate-space when all participants are able to understand it. I will work to get to that point and will edit my paradigm as I approach it. However, if your opponent cannot understand your speed, please slow down for them so we don't exclude them from the debate.

__** Arguments **__ __**Kritikal**__ My knowledge of K lit is abysmal. Like, really bad. But I want to fix that, so please run your Ks in front of me because I think they're interesting. Just slow down for tags and stuff. And, really, the whole thing. Sorry.

__**Theory**__ Not that big of a fan, but I get why we have it so do it if you've gotta. If you call yourself a theory debater, then please strike me, because I probably wont give you as high of speaks as you'd like.

If there's anything that I enjoy in theory debates, it's good, extensive standards debate. So do that. Also, feel free to cross-apply substance/FW/kritik into your theory debates. That will make me think you're smart and vote for you.

__**Tricks**__ Ew.

__** Style **__ __** Traditional LD **__ This is what I did in HS, so I'm pretty familiar with it. That also means that I've heard/partaken in your util-deont debate thousands of times, so //please// spice it up somehow. Also, please don't have a values debate. Nobody cares whether Justice or Morality comes first, and your util framework probably links into both.

__**LARP**__ I'm coming to really appreciate a good plan/CP/disad debate. Just make sure you read any plan/CP texts really slowly (maybe twice?? *cough* //speaks// *cough*) because I try to write them down. Also, I prefer structural impacts to extinction scenarios, and I tend to weigh impact defense heavily against extinction arguments.

Make sure you read a framework if you're LARPing and you're in LD. Idrc if that's util, Bostrom, Levinas, or something else, but I need some way to weigh your impacts against other ones. If you're in policy, an ethical framework would make your speaks go up cuz that's fun.

__**Performance**__ These are really fun to watch and I wish I did them more in HS. You'll probably get hella high speaks if you read the //Speed// section and adapt. //Side note 1:// Just because I enjoy performance debates doesn't mean that I'll be more inclined to vote for you if you run your performance aff. //Side note 2:// I think the aff should be related to the topic in some way (whatever way you may explain that to be). If it's not, I'll probably be biased toward neg T interps.

__** Speaker Points **__ Speaks will reflect both strategy and speaking ability, but the former will be weighted more than the latter. Here are some things that will increase your speaks (other than just strategy/speaking ability):
 * Making me laugh
 * Teaching me something new
 * Adapting to my paradigm
 * (Relevantly) Reading poetry/playing music during your speech for a strategic purpose
 * (Relevantly) Reading poetry/playing music during your speech for no strategic purpose
 * Bold decisions (e.g. straight ref neg, 1AR K)

I'll probably give you a 28.5 if I think you should break; I probably wont go below a 23 unless you did something wrong or made me uncomfortable/mad. If I ever think “wow, I'm glad I never had to debate this kid in HS”, then you'll get a 30.


 * __Other__**
 * You don't need my permission (or your opponent's) to use flex prep.
 * I will always disclose after the round unless told otherwise. Feel free to ask questions about strategies or how it played out if it'll make my explanation clearer.
 * Idrc what you're wearing before/after/during the round as long as it's not offensive. Feel free to go casual cuz suits are expensive as hell.
 * Please be inclusive. I don't support exclusion of any kind (ethical exclusion, argument exclusion, exclusion in the debate-space) and it will be really difficult to convince me otherwise.

Any questions? Email me at nhaselow@gmail.com or just ask me before round!