Steele,+Nick

__//**ONLY THING YOU NEED TO KNOW I WON THE TOC LEMME HEAR UR NEW AND INNOVATIVE WINTER AND LEIGHTON UPDATES**//__

Affiliations: Harvard Westlake Hi - My name is Nick Steele and I debated varsity LD for 4 years at Harvard Westlake. I'll try to keep this brief - my judging preferences are pretty open: I'll evaluate the round based off of the line by line. I'll try to be impartial - For example I will vote on ideal theory/Kant vs. a race AFF if good comparison and weighing are done. I will vote on politics vs. a structural violence AFF, and I will vote on K impact turns to theory, and vice versa That being said, I tend to lean more towards policy/k style arguments than theory and phil Policy args: most of what I read in highschool, I'm comfortable evaluating them Ks: I read a lot of these too, I'm familiar with all the common ones but if you're reading dense pomo or something less common please have clear overviews and tags Non T AFFs, performance, narratives, etc: all fine and I read them, they're still debate arguments so I hold them to the same standards. Hopefully they're related to the topic. Making the reason to vote AFF clear is key T framework: it's fine and necessary sometimes, the T version of the AFF debate is usually important so be clear there Theory: Good strategic theory or theory to check actual abuse is good, I will vote on frivolous theory but I don't think it's very strategic and that will be reflected in speaks I'll try to be neutral but I lean AFF on 2 or more condo, NEG on agent cp's, AFF on specific plans good, NEG on reasonable PICs but AFF on super small or random PICs. Default competing interps and drop the debater Phil: I'm familiar with and read at some point all of the common LD frameworks. I'm most familiar with consequentialism and deontology, but feel comfortable evaluating most framework debates. Same thing applies with dense fw as dense Ks Tricks/a prioris/ skep etc: will vote on them, don't like them. I think common sense responses answer a lot of these positions well Speaks: will be given based off of efficiency, giving good overviews, collapsing effectively, reading quality substantive arguments, and effectively using ethos if it suits the round. 30 - one of the best speeches I've seen all year 29.5 - you should get to late out rounds 28.9 - you should probably clear 28.5 - average Flashing: Make an email chain. If you're using a computer you should have a flash drive as back up. I won't take prep. Be fast please I won't vote on things like racism or rape good, etc. If you personally insult someone in the room or deliberately make someone uncomfortable you'll get a 0. Do what style you're best at and have fun! I'm excited to see different individual arguments styles and people debate best when they're confident in what they're reading.