Price,John

Background debated in high school policy from 2002-2006 at Forest Hills Northern. the last 3 years i have been debating for Central Michigan University In NFA-ld and parliamentary debate i have been judging high school tournaments for 3 years

i vote on the flow as much as i can, i hate judge intervention and will do my best to find an out where i dont have to. tab judging does not exist, what i want from your as a debater is tell me how to weigh the issues, and what frame work i should be operating from if you dont tell me what frame work i regress to policy. i will attempt to be "tab" but realize its not all encompassing, much like if they drop your argument "shazam i should win" im not going to vote there....

Topicality- weigh your analysis of the standards and how they access your voting rational better vs the cd/cs. again im flow if they drop a standard and your voter it makes it very easy for me to vote there. tell me why to vote on the education voter or fairness or why t is aprio etc. give me the necessary tools so i can vote for you not just blips. rvi's are offense and if they go dropped and the aff sits on them easy way for me to vote. also competing interpretations as a voter IS BAD its not a voter its a framework for viewing t ffs.

Specs and the like- same as for t, articulate your ground/abuse scenarios makes things easy for me to vote. i run a good deal of specs in college and enjoy listening to the spec debate. potential abuse is hard for me to rationalize as a voting issue your going to have to do a good amount of work if their responding to it to get my vote.

Kritiques- the more specific the better, ks should have an alternative reject alts suck but i will vote on em obviously if dropped. establish a frame work and explain how it functions, just saying dento good does not establish a framework you need to point out how the kritique functions inside of the frame work and why you then access the ballot.

CP- on dispo, define it in round other wise im going to assume its conditional, again theory debates are more then welcomed. i consider a perm a test of mutual exclusivity unless told other wise.

performance- honestly never seen one, so if your going to run it be warned im inherently biased vs it might want to strike me if u love performance

speed- i can flow any speed, be clear on author and tag is all i ask if your not being clear i will tell you multiple times b4 i stop flowing. if i cant get tag and author kind of hard for you to extend and expand in the next speech.

speaker points- 24-28 most times i give good speaks for tactical decisions, good use of cross-x, speaking style, unique arguments.

don't be a complete ass to your opponent its not necessary and i will doc speaks. besides that go at it