Goldware,+Steve

I’m currently a junior debating for Lake Highland Prep and I'm qualified to the TOC.

The short version is: I believe that debate is a space for debaters to have fun and enjoy themselves, which means that I am open to anything you want to read. If you enjoy the utilz, go ahead and larp. If you prefer Ks, read Ks. If you are good at phil, read phil. I’m not that good with flowing speed, so please slow down on tags, things you think are important, and whenever I say “clear."

I would consider myself pretty diverse as a debater, so I’m comfortable judging a lot of positions. I am most comfortable with tricks and larp, but if you want to read something different, keep reading.

If you are reading a position that you think is slightly confusing, or that took you awhile to learn, chances are I will think its confusing too. Please, please, please slow down to explain it. Super abstract phil is not my strong suit. I want clear extensions with claim, warrant and impact. If the argument was conceded I will be more lenient.

I determine speaks based on how well I think you will do at the tournament. I also determine speaks based on how fun you make the round. If you bring me food I will increase your speaks by 0.2.

Remember to weigh!!!

Defaults: These are what I default to if no weighing or arguments in favor of the other side were made in the round. These are all subject to change if you just make arguments.
 * theory before K
 * fairness 1st
 * competing interps
 * Truth testing (what it means for the res to be “true” or “false” can be determined through consequential impacts or rotb)
 * drop the arg

I am a new judge, so please keep that in mind!