Ettington,+Neil

This paradigm is accurate for the date 8/31/14 if you have any further questions please direct them to my email at squirrelconspiracy@gmail.com I will try to get back to you ASAP

Background: I competed at Palos Verdes Peninsula High school in LD and Policy debate although I consider myself a policy debater very much so in the way I view debate and I only ever went to camp for Policy. I was a K debater and did some performance as well, I really liked the squirrely arguments in all of debate both policy and kritikal

General Thoughts Concerning LD I will evaluate an LD round like a policy round, I rather dislike the traditional way of debating in LD and would prefer everything to be policy style arguments. If you don't know how to debate policy style or would like to still debate the traditional way in LD that is perfectly acceptable and I will still evaluate your arguments just know that I'm not as well versed in the LD philosophy lit as I am compared to policy and if you run policy style arguments you will earn brownie points for speaks.

Speed: To be perfectly honest, I'm a bit out of practice and I am probably rusty when it comes to the spread but I think I still should be able to flow fairly competently. Even at my peak I was never able to flow at really high speeds well, so forgive me and please be patient if I need you to slow down a bit. If I need you to slow down I will yell, " Speed." If it is clarity that is the issue I will say "Clear."

Terminal Defense: I believe it exists but you need to specify to me that it is terminal defense and why otherwise I won't vote on it.

Extensions: I'm pretty liberal with extensions, as long as you mention the argument and I know what you are talking about i will consider it extended

Presumption: Don't go for it.

CP's and Perms and Condo. I don't believe perms are a test of competition and I think they are a conditional advocacy. I think condo is reasonable but if its being abused feel free as the aff to run theory. That's pretty much it I'm pretty open to the theory arguments and all the different kinds of CP's except I dislike Consult and referendums. I'll still vote for them i just don't really like hem

Disads: They cool. Pretty standard stuff in evaluating them.

T and Theory and RVI: I like them and I'll accept reason ability and competing interps but i probably prefer competing interps and all my debates were competing interps so that's what im experienced in evaluating and please do that. What I really hate though is frivolous theory and T just done as a time suck and because of this I 100% buy RVI's and will vote for it but you really have to prove that the T/theory was so bad and abusive it is worth an RVI.

K's: I was a K debater. They were my bread and butter and I love them. I still love a good framework debate though and I do buy pre fiat K's. I like all K's but if you really want to earn my affection run Zizek.

Performance/ nontraditonal nontopical affs: I'm fine with them and I like them but you have to know that I'm extremely dense and I won't get it unless you really break it down for me. You can go crazy in round I'm cool with it. One of the things I have done was run a Jurassic Park Aff on the latin america topic and I became a dinosaur and ate my opponents flow for running framework against me. So I'll allow a lot.

Speaks: I'm a bit of a point fairy. I base speaks on competency and entertainment value. Ill hack speaks for you if I think you should break and its your bubble round. But when I think something is bad I do give out really low speaks. My last tournaments judging ive given a lot of 29's and a lot of 25's so just follow my paradigm and try to be entertaining and you might get a 30. im not especially stingy with them