Hobbs,+Emma

I competed both locally and nationally for 4 years and I'm now a policy debater at ASU. I try to be as tab as possible, so run whatever you want. Debate can be a game or a forum or really what ever you want, just tell me how you want me to evaluate the round and I'll do so. Speed is cool. Do what you want and debate well if you want my ballot.

For the love of all things holy, please impact back to something...anything. I will be very sad if you're making a great arg but not giving me any mechanism with which to weigh it. This means read a role of the ballot with a k, read voters on theory, or defend your framework!

Theory/T: I'm fine with it, I'll vote on it. I have a pretty low threshold for theory--run it if you want. If you want to really win on theory there are a few things.
 * For LD:**
 * 1) Please make the internal links to your voters clear in your standards.
 * 2) Tell me--very coherently--what to do about RVIs (I don't have a default)
 * 3) Please please don't make me intervene on theory. __**This means weigh between competing shells**__!!! If you weigh theory well, I will vote the way you want me to.

Kritiks:Yes please! I ran a lot of Ks in high school and am now a K debater in policy. I'm pretty well versed in baudrillard, antiblackness/afropess/wilderson, virillio, butler, marxism, psychoanalysis and fem rage so I feel comfortable evaluating most anything. Do not run a K in front of me if you do not know it--I won't intervene against you if you're winning it, but it will probably hurt your speaks and I will feel sad. If it's really dense, slow down a little for tags (go like 80% of your max speed). I'm a fan of performance ks as long as you give me a firm way to decide the round. Be clear on your ROB.

Extensions: Be clear and tell me why it matters. I don't need you to extend everything in your last speech, just show me where your winning and why it's more important than where you're losing. Honestly, if you're winning, and you know you're winning (like they dropped theory or didn't respond to/try to win under your rob) extend that and sit down. I'll vote on the highest level of debate in the easiest place.

Plans/CPs: go for it.

Other stuff: If you want to have a util/deon debate, that's fine with me. I don't really care. I'll evaluate whatever you give me. Just be clear as to why you're winning what.

Speaks: Probably on the higher end. I'll average 28. Be strategic and run cool stuff and I'll give you higher speaks. If you're really offensive (anti-semitic, racist, homophobic, etc) I'm not opposed to giving you a 0.

Key to my ballot: Spend a simple 20 seconds at the end of your last speech explaining how I break down the debate. Tell me where to go first and why you're winning there. Make it really simple for me to fill out my ballot. If you want to win, tell me why.

Pretty much the same as the LD paradigm. I like to judge LD like policy (bc thats pretty much how I debated when I was in LD) so it should all make sense. I like good debates, I get bored when people arent making good responses. I love when args are numbered because I feel as though it makes everyone do a better job at being clear and responding to arguments. Ask me anything before the round. I really like K on K debate, just be clear and explanatory. If you have any questions, ask me before the round or find me/message me on facebook.
 * For Policy:**