Burke,+Kym

Background: I am a new judge. My son does Varsity LD so I have some familiarity with tech.

Paradigm: I can follow most speeds, but I am new to spread. If you are going to spread, I need to be in the email chain. Just for your information, If you spread I would like for you to briefly explain the arg first (at a moderate to fast speed is fine), then you can speak as fast as you'd like.

T- Don't engage in frivolous Theory, I hate it. If you do that, it will be noted on my ballot and weighted into the RFD. Also, tricks are new and I typically don't enjoy them. I have no trouble understanding arguments against basic abuse (time skew, strat skew, limits, research burdens, etc.), However, if you are going to engage in more advanced T debate, please explain the argument clearly (condo bad/good, aspec, pic's bad, etc.). I don't really buy RVI's unless they are clearly warranted. I believe that just because you are fair doesn't mean you should win (after all debate is a competitive event). I believe being fair is a pre-condition to engaging in substantive debate. Unless it is overly abusive ( to the point where substance is a distant thought), I usually won't weight heavily on an RVI. Once again, I am a new judge so keep it on the simpler side, but I can understand more complex T if the args are explained thoroughly.

K- I typically don't have any struggle with K debate. I'd like the shell clearly delineated. Perms don't really interest me. I enjoy debate that has some aspect of tech to it, so judging the K is my forte. I enjoy K debate, I prefer K debate, so if you engage in it, the round is much more interesting for me. I understand kritikal affs but once again make sure to explain the args clearly.

DA- I am fine with this. FYI, if uniqueness is attacked, I weight it more heavily in the RFD.

CP- I am fine with these as well. PIC's are newer to me and prefer the regular CP. I also don't really enjoy Agent CP's (not sure if these are in LD or not). Misc. preferences- I have little to no experience judging non-topical AC's and would prefer If you would refrain.

Once again, as I am a newer judge, I struggle understanding advanced topic lit. (deleuze, agamben, etc.) However, if you are running them just be sure to explain the args clearly.