Berg,+Kayleen

Policy debater at Northern Iowa, did PF/Congress/Speech in high school CPs: They’re fine but I have a decently low threshold for permutations. Not a fan of PICs unless there’s a real strong net benefit. Process CPs are the worst because they’re usually not mutually exclusive. Don’t read them if you have other options. DAs: Yes, read them. Go for them. If you can give a compelling reason that you turn case you pretty much win. Impact framing has to be a big deal in the 2NR. T: I’ve voted for it but probably won’t unless you spend 5 minutes in the 2NR impacting out literally every standard and voter. Proven abuse is pretty key to winning on T, unless it gets dropped in the 1AR or something. T version of the aff is convincing. Ks: You probably can’t win on a K in front of me if you just extend taglines – links, warrants, impacts and impact framing have to be very very clear throughout the entire debate. Definitively willing to vote for weird kritiks and death good type stuff. Non topical affs: fine if you can prove they’re in the direction of the topic. If you have a version with a plan or that uses the state that would be preferable. If you’re reading a K aff and don’t have well developed FW/T blocks you probably shouldn’t be reading a K aff.  kayberg@uni.edu for email chains