Yang,+Jon


 * Background** - I debated at Edina High School from 09-13 and have been to the TOC.As a caveat, I've been out of the activity for 2 years. Therefore, in regards to topic specific information, make sure to **clearly explain everything**.

Quick n Dirty >
 * I enjoy negative strategies that engage with the aff. Therefore, specific counterplan/DA, Case/DA, strategies will be looked upon favorably. Additionally, I have no qualms with the kritik having experience with DnG/Bataille type arguments. With that being said, I prefer more "policy" type kritiks
 * **Speed = Ideas Communicated / minute**. If I don’t understand an argument, I will be less able/willing to vote on it, so if something is especially important, slow down and emphasize. If I don't understand, I will make it clear
 * I will always give preference to the side that does a better job debating their evidence. An argument isn't dropped if it is intuitively answered by another argument in a speech. You can get good speaker points by being sweet in the CX or funny in your speech. It’s pretty hard to offend me and I’m not really the type to dock speaker points for being mean.
 * **Resolve the debate for me** - You can help me out by impacting out how your arguments implicate the rest of the debate and provide lenses to view certain arguments. Do comparison between arguments whether that be impact calc or ev comparison. A situation which makes it difficult to judge is when one team will say, "PC not key, votes are determined by ideology" while the other team will say just the opposite "PC is key to vote switching and putting pressure on constituencies." The question of how to resolve this debate is really really hard without ev comparison or something along those lines.
 * To quote Vitzileos, " An argument is a claim and warrant with an impact -- while this seems obvious, you'd be surprised"
 * Ask me if you have any specific questions.


 * Now more specific stuff -**

Disads
 * I prefer specific DA - if you're going to go for politics you **must** do evidence comparison - it is not enough just to read 14 uniqueness cards

Kritiks -

Theory
 * you **must** impact these arguments - otherwise, the threshold for these arguments to be a voting issue is extremely high. I default to rejecting the argument.

Counterplans -

Topicality Like theory, make sure to impact these arguments. I might not be the best judge for these types of arguments