Lovell,+Ashley

My paradigm  First - Never Run Aff Time Skew. Seriously. I believe in good debating. I don’t hate anything. Except disclosure theory at the Meadows Tournament. The easiest and most interesting thing for me to evaluate is substance debate. I’m not anti–theory but I don’t always understand its relevance or why it comes first (so if you use it, make that extremely clear). Ultimately, make clear what is important/what I should be looking to and that is how I will evaluate the round. Clarity is very important to me; I’m not great with superspeed. The people who get the highest points often slow down during key points, or summarize and restate arguments as they go. I am much more inclined to listen to people when they are respectful to one another and forthright about their cases. Making your argument more difficult to understand for the other person during cross –ex or responses will also make it more difficult for me to understand, and I won’t be able to evaluate it. Telling me which side has it harder in debate is not a good strategy. I rarely care about overviews and/or underviews about why I should prefer a side. I find these especially strange in the AC or NC. Extensions should be clear, but if the argument is clear throughout the debate I am pretty good at drawing arrows, so you don’t have to spend too much time on it in the 2ar. Feel free to ask me any specific questions.