Gronek,+Christopher

Caveat: one of my greatest errors as a debater was reading judges' paradigms and accepting them as law. When I say "I can handle speed," it doesn't mean that I'm dying to flow your 2,000 word AC. It means that if you need to read at a very fast pace, I don't really care what you run as long as you articulate it well. I will yell "clear" if I can't understand you. With that said, Acceptable:good kritiks; good off case; good a priori; well structured and unique T; good arguments with strong criteria, warrants, and values; theory Not Acceptable: bad kritiks you don't understand, poorly/ insufficiently warranted a priori, stock T shells, boring stock arguments with poor warrants, bad theory

It really annoyed me when my opponents asked my judges "what do I have to do to get a 30?" I will assign speaker points at my own discretion. With that said, some things you can do to make me dock your speaker points:

1. Personally offend me or your opponent 2. Continually raise the volume of your voice because you think it makes you more persuasive 3. Repeat yourself because you didn't utilize your prep effectively enough 4. Dump 30 cards on the flow and get them mixed up, confusing me (and probably also yourself) in the process 5. Mock your opponent when you're clearly winning

It's really great if you have a firm grasp on Zizek. I don't. You can run it, but you'd better explain it well. I have been in outrounds of the Mineapple, Berkeley, Stanford, The Meadows, and SoCal tournaments like Cypress and Pepperdine, so I'm used to all the bizarre forms of regional debate.

I really think the round belongs to the debaters. If you want to sit, I really don't care. If you want to use flex prep, that's fine. (as long as the tournament doesn't have a rule against it) It's not okay to do things that interfere with your opponent's performance, like shuffle through cards while she's speaking, grab pages of your opponent's case as they're set down without prior consent, etc. Your disrespect will cost you speaker points. All judging is interventionist; no tournament has a rubric for assigning wins and losses, so you know what I think about cases and arguments and it's up to you to make me sign the ballot in your favor (through good argumentation, not coercion).

Tell me where to vote. If you don't, I'll vote any place I feel like it.