Hellebuick,+Ashley

I debated for three years in high school. I did one year of Lincoln-Douglas and two years of Policy. I competed on the national circuit quite a bit my senior year.

I'm fine with all kinds of arguments, but here are some specifics:

CP/DA I appreciate a good straight-up debate. I love PICs, but am susceptible to theory if well argued and if the abuse is clearly articulated. All disads and counterplans are fine by me, but I'm more likely to be on your side if they're case-specific. That doesn't go to say I won't vote on a generic agent CP, you just have to make sure you do a really good job on the impact debate.

K I ran the K a lot in high school and it still remains my favorite argument. I'd prefer you have case-specific links and a clear alternative; make sure you articulate both to me! I greatly appreciate overviews on the K flow.

T I like impacts on T. I don't like kritiks of topicality, but if impacted and well flushed out I'll vote on it. I default to competing interpretations, but can be persuaded to reasonability. If you're going to go for T in front of me, make sure to spend a good amount of time on the standards debate. Saying "They make us lose ground by doing X. That's unfair to us 'cause we have nothing to run and will always lose" simply isn't going to cut it.

Theory Clearly prove abuse and/or how the opposite team makes debate worse, and I'll probably vote for you.

I try to intervene as little as possible and hate calling for evidence, but I will if a certain piece of evidence is contested or absolutely necessary. Please feel free to ask me questions. I definitely tried to make this as concise as possible so I probably left some key things out.