Bloss,+Brian

I have been involved with the activity for a decade now, eight years as a competitor on the high school and collegiate levels. I competed in policy in the Dallas area in high school. I placed 3rd in the country in college LD (single person policy) in 2007. I was one of 8 All-American Debaters named by the National Parliamentary Debate Association in 2009.I can keep up with your rate of delivery don't worry about that. If for some reason I can't understand you I'll say clear that's your warning in terms of speaks. I have helped work on a presidential campaign's debate prep team so I have dealt with this activity on multiple levels.

My default paradigm is that of a policymaker. I believe debate is a game of competing solutions having said that I am not opposed to kritiks provided they are done well. I studied under Dr. Chris Layne and love debates about international relations. I will listen to almost anything.

I prefer weighted analysis of impacts in the world of disads and advantages and case turns but again still it is possible to have other types of arguments made. __**Role of the**__ **Ballot:** As far as I am concerned the ballot only serves as a tool to demonstrate I fulfilled my judging obligation.

__**Performances:**__ Not a fan. Don't run them in front of me.


 * __Kritiks__:** Kritiks are fine provided that you have a viable textual alternative. Just saying "reject the aff" is not a viable alternative because it doesn't prove solvency. I am not a huge fan of capitalism bad but then again I need to hear impact turns as to why capitalism is good (sadly it doesn't seem like I see enough of this).

__**Theory:**__ I am open to theory debates but don't make it sloppy. I am fine with spec arguments and everything else but don't just throw out theory for the sake of throwing it out. Here are some theory arguments that can potentially give you an edge with me:
 * Abuse:** Give me the ground you have lost, don't just say "well there is a potential for abuse".
 * Counterplans:** Presumption flips affirmative when a counterplan is run.
 * RVI's:** Congratulations you are topical or met a minimum of your burden I guess? It's not a reason for me to vote though unless you have a compelling reason why.

__**Topicality:**__ I think T often is run as a time suck. However, explain to me how the interpretation destroys your ground (and give me demonstrable ground loss) then we can have a T-debate.