White,Wynton

I debated at Pines Charter on both the national and local circuit.

I will vote for any argument you make no matter how ridiculous or bizarre it is as long as you provide me with a warrant.

**Theory:** Go for it- I wasn’t the best theory debater but this is probably one of the easier things for me to evaluate as a judge. Slow down on the interpretation if its nuanced. I will vote on disclosure theory. If neither debater makes arguments I default to the following: - Drop the arg on theory, drop the debater on T - Competing interns - Norms creation model -No RVIs -Fairness is a voter

**Tricks:** My high school teammate loved tricks (shoutout to Scopa). As a result, I have been exposed to the world of tricks. I will vote on tricks and a prioris as long as you are explaining their implication in the round and winning why they are relevant.

**Ks:** I enjoy a good K debate. I read Ks often; however, I won’t vote for arguments I cannot understand at all. Otherwise I am totally down to judge a K debate.

**Larp:** I was never a huge larper, never judged a high level larp round. Although these won’t be my most enjoyable rounds as a judge, go for it if you think that's your best route to the ballot.

**Fwk:** I enjoy a good framework debate, I flow pretty well so as long as you clearly label arguments and weigh I can fairly evaluate these rounds.

**Speaks:** I am generally high in my speaker point assignments, however being abusive in rounds will be an automatic dock. Creativity, clever args and good strategy will impress me and reflect in speaks.

If you have any specific questions ask me before the round.