Ayon,+Martha

Although policy debate is an activity heavily based on evidence I value an in-depth, comparative analysis of the arguments being presented by the aff/neg more than a ton of cards with blippy tag lines. I am not inclined to voting up teams who simply read at the speed of light without examining the content of arguments. In other words, just because you can read more cards in the debate does not necessarily guarantee you will win my ballot!

Having been a 2A I feel that the most important thing for the affirmative to explain is why their “case outweighs” and how the plan uniquely solves for the harms that were presented in the 1ac. A quick way for me to drop you on affirmative is if you never mention your case again after the 1ac, so be sure to funnel the debate to the world of the aff.

Specifically for the negative, despite the fact that I am personally more inclined to critical debates and kritiks I also do not foreclose on traditional debates that go in the route of disads + cps. It is up to you to convince me that the affirmative is not a good idea whether that be with a cp, k, c/a, etc. Also, make sure you communicate what the ROTB for your cp, alt, c/a is because without an articulation it becomes hard for me to know what I would be voting for.

And one last thing- I do not ever vote on T so don’t waste your time running it or my time flowing it!