Chung,+Steve

I debated LD in high school. I flow pretty accurately but I am not a huge fan of zero to sixty auctioneer-style debating where what you are saying degrades the arguments into a words per minute contest. I'm a fan of manners, so my tolerance for rudeness is pretty low, I think there are certain etiquette issues that get lost in debate these days (not to sound senile or anything). They aren't voting factors but you can bet that they will be reflected in your speaker points. Speakers that keep at a pace that they are comfortable at and not stumbling over their words / talking to the ground and/or paper will get props from me. I have no problems with extreme theories or arguments as long as they have sound logic, reasoning, strategy, or any combination thereof. Like any reasonable person in the world I like a why to the what. A warrant to a claim, maybe even excite me with an impact to the warrant. It's bread and butter nuts and bolts kind of stuff folks. If you're a theory-person, play your game, if you're into spreading, spread away, I'm with you as long as you make sense. I'm a pretty transparent person when it comes to seeing what I do and do not like. If you've been talking about deontological theory for the past thirty minutes and I feel as though you're just on repeat I will stop flowing and just stare which is pretty good indication to anyone to move on, if you make a claim that doesnt make sense you'll probably be able to tell, if you make sense you may get a nod or two.