Brooks,+Hunter

I haven't judged in many years. Even when I did, my flow was never that good. Slowness will help, especially in the 2NR.

I have a pretty serious statistical aff bias.

I don't intervene on this issue, but I don't like kritiks, at least the way they are commonly deployed, primarily because I don't understand what most of them are saying and what they have to do with the aff.

On the other hand, the following are areas where **I am likely to intervene** more than the average judge.


 * The aff needs to be topical (i.e. there needs to be a clear interpretation of the resolution which they meet and which is reasonable for the negative.) A topical affirmative can be justified in many ways, but still has to defend that the resolution is good.


 * I think "reject the argument, not the team" is automatic on all theory arguments, and in particular will not vote on independent voting issues raised on a permutation.


 * I strongly prefer line-by-line style evaluation of the debate. If you don't answer the other team's arguments in an organized fashion, I am justified in doing work for them if they accidentally drop one of yours.


 * On the flip side, I don't think a tagline is the same thing as an argument, so I don't punish teams for dropping taglines, especially if well-developed arguments that are made nearby on the flow are also answers.