Doyle,+Wil

I was a debater at the University of Utah debating college parliamentary debate, and debated policy and PF throughout high school. There's not much that you are can do that I'm going to "not like" I just like seeing creative arguments, good turns, and seeing people at least pretend they can stand the debaters on the other team. You can go as progressive as you like with me, speed is not going to be an issue unless your spreading is not decipherable, in that case I will say "clear." The one thing I must insist on is that speakers CLEARLY READ THEIR TAGLINES. I'm going to be judging the debate based almost entirely on flow so it's important that I can actually read and write what you are arguing, I'm not going to flow cross-examination though, if you want anything brought up in cross-x to be a part of the debate, then mention it in your next speech. K debates are totally fine with me as long as they aren't phoned in, your links to their argument and how it interacts with your K are super important and need to be explained and argued for in detail. Also, please no psychobabble, if you don't understand the K you are running, then don't run it. Framework is also important in the debate, if you want me to judge through ontology or epistemology or whatever just make it clear and try to smash your opponents framework. I wan't to see cool and interesting things in the rounds I judge so don't be afraid to experiment, as long as you have a good argument, you won't be penalized for whatever you run. At the end of the day I'm going to judge the impacts how I'm told to judge them and that's going to decide the debate. Have a good time and try some cool stuff!