Olsen,Nick

I did LD in high school and preferred a progressive style. I can handle speed, and will give an audible "clear" if I cannot understand you. COMPREHENSIVE UNDERVIEWS AND CLEAR EXTENSIONS. Do not extend a point hidden in the interior of a card that was not stressed prior. I think that spreading through key parts of evidence (tags and crucial lines) is abusive, especially when an opponent does not seem comfortable with speed.

Theory: DO NOT SPREAD THEORY. I do not need it to be carded, so make sure it is coherent. If theory debate becomes a place to out spread your opponent, it is no longer a way to check and balance the rules of debate. I will explain more about this before round if asked.

Original arguments delight me, and VERY original arguments delight me more! Make me laugh, I like that. Racism/ Sexism/ Homophobia/ Classicism/ other offensive "isms" are not original.

Notes: I do allow flex prep, I do not flow CX, I hate that people include judges on email chains (If the judge just reads the cases, why even have constructive speeches)

**Policy Specific**: As stated previously I am used to LD, and prefer it. That being said, I had dabbled in policy. This means I understand basic lingo, and can follow along structurally pretty well. However, as I am less comfortable with Policy, I will need better articulated underviews and overviews. I will prefer you if I can understand what you are doing. I will give an audible clear, then if I still cant understand I will stop flowing. I can handle LD speed, so take that into consideration. (If you are much faster than that I may not understand what you are saying). Sorry I'm not a policy judge, but consider this a test in judge adaptation.