Pitman,+James

Alpharetta '13 Auburn '17

slow down more than you would in front of most judges. Clarity and persuasion are important. You can spread through cards etc, slow down on other things.

I am more a fan of policy arguments, especially now.

K: Fine with them as long as they are well-explained. K tricks can be executed properly in front of me and the Aff often does not cover these properly. Not a fan of any K that has someone's name as the name. Reps K's are better. Provide clarity and be structured - don't make long overviews.

T: I don't like T, because it often is contrived and teams don't do real impact comparison, but will vote either way. If the Aff is clearly untypical, it's different.

CP: Most are fine, CP's that result in the whole Aff are bad and Aff teams should use theory against them more.

DA: I love them, please read them.

Theory: 2 condo is fine bur debatable, Very low threshold If it's less. Don't make more than 2 perms or it will be problematic.

Also in any debate any dropped argument is a true argument

K Affs: It should relate to this year's topic and the USFG should act. You can have critical advantages. If its a k aff that is clearly not topical then i have a really really really really really low threshold on T

if you drop an off case position as the Aff i will stop flowing you.