Connor,+John

I evaluate all argument //types// on an equal level.

The first criterion I default to when comparing arguments is that of causal logic. If you spend 5 minutes on a tics DA in the 2nr, but lack or have a vague internal link, I can easily be swayed by a 30 second 2ar explicating on this point. The areas where this seems to be an issue most often is on topicality voters, theory standards, and alternative "solvency".

I have very little background knowledge on this topic and thus will not be able to follow every acronym you throw at me while reading 200 wpm. I don't require that everything be spelled out, but make sure your arguments are contextualized in a way that conveys the coherent story that it was intended to, so that I may evaluate it in a likewise manner.

I can better determine round issues to be attentive towards after a few rounds this year.